CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 2 septembre 1992

.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial }                              FIRST CHAMBER                         Application No. 18768/91                       by Grace PEPRAH-BAAWUAH                       against the United Kingdom           The European Commission of Human Rights (First Chamber) sitting in private on 2 September 1992, the following members being present:                MM.   J.A. FROWEIN, President of the First Chamber                   F. ERMACORA                   E. BUSUTTIL                   A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK              Sir   Basil HALL              Mr.   C.L. ROZAKIS              Mrs. J. LIDDY              MM.   M. PELLONPÄÄ                   B. MARXER                Mr.   M. de SALVIA, Secretary to the First Chamber              assisted by Mrs. S. DOLLE           Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;         Having regard to the application introduced on 19 July 1991 by Grace PEPRAH-BAAWUAH against the United Kingdom and registered on 7 September 1991 under file No. 18768/91;         Having regard to:   -      the reports provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure of       the Commission;   -      the Commission's decision of 1 April 1992 to bring the       application to the notice of the respondent Government and invite       them to submit written observations on its admissibility and       merits;   -      the information provided by the applicant on 13 May 1992,       confirmed by the Government on 20 May 1992.         Having deliberated;         Decides as follows:   THE FACTS         The applicant is a citizen of Ghana, born in 1953, who at the time of lodging her application was living in London.         She is represented before the Commission by Mr. Stephen Cragg, a Solicitor with the Hackney Law Centre.         The applicant originally complained to the Commission about her proposed deportation from the United Kingdom as an illegal entrant. She had lived and worked in the United Kingdom since 1982 and has two daughters, the first born in 1979 and a citizen of the United States of America, the second born in 1980 and a citizen of the United Kingdom.   It was proposed to leave the girls behind in State care for social, educational and health reasons, given difficulties the applicant would face in Ghana.   The applicant invoked Articles 8 and 13 of the Convention.   PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION         The application was introduced on 19 July 1991 and registered on 7 September 1991.   From the outset the applicant requested the Commission to intervene under Rule 36 of the Rules of Procedure to stay her removal to Ghana pending its examination of her Article 8/family life claim.   On 9 September 1991 the Commission refused to make the indication requested in view of the fact that the case raised no issue under Article 3 of the Convention and was, therefore, not of the kind where a Rule 36 indication would normally be considered.         After a preliminary examination of the case by the Rapporteur, the Commission considered the admissibility of the application on 1 April 1992.   It decided to give notice of the case to the respondent Government, pursuant to Article 48 para. 2 (b) of the Rules of Procedure, and to invite the parties to submit their written observations on admissibility and merits.         On 13 May 1992 the applicant's representative informed the Commission that his client had now been granted indefinite leave to remain in the United Kingdom together with her daughters and that she wished to withdraw her application.   The Government confirmed the grant of indefinite leave on 20 May 1992.   REASONS FOR THE DECISION         The Commission notes that the applicant's complaint has been resolved by leave being granted for her to remain indefinitely in the United Kingdom with her family.   It also notes that the applicant no longer wishes to pursue her application.   The Commission considers that there are no reasons of a general character affecting respect for Human Rights as defined in the Convention which   necessitate the further retention of this case.   It concludes therefore that the requirements of Article 30 para. 1 of the Convention have been met.         For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously,         DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF ITS LIST OF CASES.   Secretary to the First Chamber           President of the First Chamber           (M. de SALVIA)                             (J.A. FROWEIN)