Application no. 43489/02
by Valentin Fedorovich KRAVCHENKO
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 K. Jungwiert,
Mr V. Butkevych,
Mr M. Ugrekhelidze,
Mrs A. Mularoni,
Mrs E. Fura-Sandström, judges,
and Mrs S. Dollé, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 22 November 2002,
Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together,
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
The applicant, Mr Valentin Fedorovich Kravchenko, is a Ukrainian national who was born in 1935 and lives in Dniprodzerzhynsk. He is represented before the Court by Mr P. Kukta, a lawyer practising in Dniprodzerzhynsk.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
In 2001 the applicant instituted proceedings in the Zavodskyi District Court of Dniprodzerzhynsk against the Municipal Enterprise “Dniprodzerzhynskelectrotrans”, seeking recovery of salary arrears and compensation for non-pecuniary damage. On 16 May 2001 the court awarded the applicant UAH 1,520.121 in salary arrears and other payments.
On 26 June 2002 the Zavodskyi District Bailiffs’ Service of Dniprodzerzhynsk discontinued the enforcement proceedings because of the debtor’s lack of funds.
According to the Government, the judgment in the applicant’s favour was partly enforced, the outstanding debt being UAH 884.292.
The applicant complained in substance under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the non-enforcement of the judgment in his favour. He invoked Articles 1 and 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1. The applicant further complained under Article 4 § 1 of the Convention that he had been subjected to slavery due to the fact that his work had not been remunerated.
Notice of the application was given to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits of the applicant’s complaint on 24 February 2005. On 11 March 2005 the applicant was invited to submit his observations in reply. However, the Court notes that the applicant has failed to do so. Moreover, he has failed to respond to a registered letter dated 27 July 2005, which his representative received on 4 August 2005, warning the applicant of the possibility that his case might be struck out of the Court’s list.
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 examination of this application to be continued. Accordingly, the application of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention 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
KRAVCHENKO v. UKRAINE DECISION
KRAVCHENKO v. UKRAINE DECISION