Belgium [GC] - 60125/11 Judgment 17.11.2016 [GC] Article 37 Article 37-1 Striking out applications Applicants’ failure to keep in touch with their lawyer: struck out Facts – The applicants, a married couple

Accordingly, it considers that it can conclude on that basis that the applicants have lost interest in the proceedings and no longer intend to pursue the application, within the meaning of Article 37 §

Struck out of the list (Article 37-1 - Striking out applications;Article 37-1-c - Continued examination not justified)

Struck out of the list (Art. 37) Striking out applications-{general};(Art. 37-1-c) Continued examination not justified

    The Court further notes that Article 37 § 1 of the Convention, in its relevant part, reads: “1.

The Government provided the Court with copies of their decisions to this effect. 37 .

Germany (striking out) [GC] - 38030/12 Judgment 21.9.2016 [GC] Article 37 Article 37-1 Striking out applications Assurance that the applicant would not be expelled on the basis of the expulsion order which

    Accordingly, the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 (c)). 37.

    Article 37 § 1 of the Convention provides: “1.

Struck out of the list (Art. 37) Striking out applications-{general};(Art. 37-1-c) Continued examination not justified

font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 78 September 2005 Van Houten v. the Netherlands - 25149/03 Judgment 29.9.2005 [Section III] Article 37

    The exercise of this power is, however, subject to the conditions set out in Article 37 § 1 and Article 38 § 1(b) of the Convention, which respectively govern the striking out of applications

    The Court further notes that Article 37 § 1 of the Convention, in its relevant part, reads: “1.

    The Court further notes that Article 37 § 1 of the Convention, in its relevant part, reads: “1.

satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (Article 37

avait adressé à la victime une correspondance, distincte des offres d'indemnisation, formulant expressément une demande de justificatifs, la cour d'appel a violé les articles L. 211-9, L. 211-13, R. 211-37

M. et Mme U... et la société Primalp font grief à l'arrêt de condamner la CGI Bat à payer aux maîtres de l'ouvrage les sommes de 5 964,50 euros au titre de nouvelles réserves et de 37 124,60 euros au titre

condamné à 2 ans d'emprisonnement et à 5 ans d'interdiction des droits civiques, civils et de famille ; Vu le mémoire produit ; Sur le premier moyen de cassation, pris de la violation des articles 222-37

et L. 121-41 du Code de la consommation ; En cet état : Sur le premier moyen de cassation, pris de la violation des articles L. 121-36, L. 121-37 et L. 121-41 du Code de la consommation, 121-3 du