I.M.S. proti Albánii

THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 55799/12
I.M.S.
against Albania

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 24 November 2022 as a Committee composed of:

Ioannis Ktistakis, President,
Darian Pavli,
Andreas Zünd, judges,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 13 July 2012,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant, I.M.S., a private company registered in 1999 in Albania.

The applicant’s complaints under Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 concerning the delayed enforcement of a domestic decision were communicated to the Albanian Government (“the Government”), the friendly‑settlement procedure being set in motion through the offices of the Registrar upon communication, followed by a unilateral declaration submitted by the Government.

The applicant’s representative informed the Court in reply that since October 2021 they carried several unsuccessful attempts to contact the applicant company by registered post, electronic mail and phone. The representative stressed that they could not continue acting in the applicant company’s name in the absence of contact and further instructions.

By letter of 13 April 2022, the representative was asked to inform the Court whether they maintained contact with the applicant company and, if so, whether the latter wished to pursue its application. Their attention was drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike an application out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application.

By letter dated 12 May 2022, the representative informed the Court that further attempts to contact the applicant gave no result. They, however, invited the Court to pursue the examination of the case.

THE LAW

In the light of the foregoing, recalling that an applicant’s representative cannot meaningfully pursue the application lodged before it in the absence of instructions from a client when requested by the Court, the latter concludes that the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue the application (Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention) (see V.M. and Others v. Belgium (striking out) [GC], no. 60125/11, §§ 35-37, 17 November 2016). It also finds no particular circumstance relating to respect for human rights guaranteed by the Convention or its Protocols which require it to continue the examination of the application pursuant to Article 37 § 1 in fine.

Accordingly, the case should be struck out of the list.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.

Done in English and notified in writing on 15 December 2022.

Viktoriya Maradudina Ioannis Ktistakis
Acting Deputy Registrar President