Application no. 22768/02
by Yakov Vasilyevich TARAN
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 22 November 2005 as a Chamber composed of:
Mr A.B. Baka, President,
Mr I. Cabral Barreto,
Mr V. Butkevych,
Mrs A. Mularoni,
Mrs E. Fura-Sandström,
Ms D. Jočienė,
Mr D. Popović, judges,
and Mrs S. Dollé, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 1 October 2001,
Having regard to the decisions to communicate the application and to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention with a view to the joint examination of the admissibility and merits of the case,
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
The applicant, Mr Yakov Vasylyevich Taran, is a Ukrainian national, who was born in 1938 and currently resides in Kharkiv.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
The applicant is an employee of the Kharkiv Electro-Mechanical Factory (the “KEMF”).
On 22 March 1999 and 29 January 2001 the Moskovsky District Court of Kharkiv ordered the KEMF to pay the applicant UAH 1,370.46 and UAH 495, respectively, in salary arrears.
On 30 November 2001 the Moskovsky District Execution Service informed the applicant that this judgment could not be executed due to the KEMF’s lack of funds.
The applicant complained about the non-execution of the judgments of 22 March 1999 and 29 January 2001 of the Moskovsky District Court of Kharkiv. He also complained about an infringement of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.
Notice of the application was given to the Government on 24 October 2003. The Government submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits of the applicant’s complaint on 2 February 2004. The applicant has failed to submit observations in reply. Moreover, he has failed to respond to the communications from the Registry of the Court, the last of which was a registered letter dated 13 September 2005 warning the applicant of the possibility that his case might be struck out of the Court’s list if he failed to respond. The applicant received this letter on 21 September 2005.
Having regard to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, the Court concludes that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. 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 further examination of this case. Accordingly, the application of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention to the case should be discontinued.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
S. Dollé A.B. Baka
TARAN v. UKRAINE DECISION
TARAN v. UKRAINE DECISION