FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 1116/03
by Gancho Stanev DELEV
against Bulgaria
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 16 December 2008 as a Chamber composed of:

and Stephen Phillips, Deputy ,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 19 December 2002,
Having regard to the correspondence with the parties,
Having regard to the decision of Zdravka Kalaydjieva, the judge elected in respect of Bulgaria, to withdraw from the case (Rule 28 of the Rules of Court) and the decision of the Bulgarian Government to designate the judge elected in respect of “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”, Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska, as ad hoc judge in the above case (Rule 29 of the Rules of Court),
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Gancho Stanev Delev, is a Bulgarian national born in 1947 and living in Krushare. He was represented before the Court by Mr N. Runevski, a lawyer practising in Sofia. The Bulgarian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms M. Dimova, of the Ministry of Justice.
The applicant complained under Articles 3 and 6 § 1 of the Convention that a set of criminal proceedings against him had lasted unreasonably long, and under Article 13 of the Convention about the lack of effective remedies in this respect. He additionally complained under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 that in the course of the proceedings the authorities had impounded a number of items and had refused to restitute them to him.
By letter dated 3 June 2008 the Government's observations were sent to the applicant's representative, who was requested to submit, by 24 July 2008, observations in reply, together with any claims for just satisfaction. By further letter, dated 24 September 2008 and sent by registered post, his attention was drawn to the fact that the time‑limit for submitting such observations and claims had expired on 24 July 2008, and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicant's representative received this letter on 1 October 2008. No response has been received.
THE LAW
The Court finds that, in the circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer intending to pursue his application, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. As the Court sees no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights which require the continued examination of the case, considers it appropriate to strike the application out of its list of cases.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
	Stephen Phillips	 Peer Lorenzen
	Deputy Registrar	President