BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
European Court of Human Rights |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Ioan FODOREAN and Mihaela Anca DIACON v Romania - 7120/05 [2012] ECHR 544 (13 March 2012) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2012/544.html Cite as: [2012] ECHR 544 |
||
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Applications nos.
7120/05 and 25803/08
by Ioan FODOREAN and Mihaela Anca DIACON
against Romania
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 13 March 2012 as a Committee composed of:
Alvina
Gyulumyan, President,
Ineta
Ziemele,
Mihai
Poalelungi, judges,
and
Marialena Tsirli, Deputy
Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above applications lodged respectively on 14 February 2005 and on 22 May 2008,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicants, Mr Ioan Fodorean and Ms Anca Mihaela Diacon, are Romanian nationals who were born in 1951 and 1960 and live in Cluj Napoca and in Bucharest, respectively. The applicant in the second application was represented by Mr I.M. Macovei, lawyer. The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms I. Cambrea, from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 of the Convention were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicants, who were invited to submit their own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letters.
By letters dated respectively 14 October 2011 and 29 November 2011, sent by registered post, the applicants were notified that the period allowed for submission of their observations had expired on 25 January 2011 and 2 March 2011 respectively and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicants’ attention was drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike a case out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application.
The above-mentioned letters in both applications remained unanswered.
THE LAW
Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to join them in a single decision.
The Court further considers that, in the specified circumstances, the applicants may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue their applications, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. Furthermore, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 in fine, the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the continued examination of the cases.
In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to join the applications;
Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases.
Marialena Tsirli Alvina Gyulumyan
Deputy Registrar President