CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 19 janvier 2010

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .sE7A0A3F4 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.25pt; text-align:justify } .sA3C2123C { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:28.35pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s88A92475 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sDD165512 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA5E34492 { width:18.86pt; display:inline-block } .sB2998F02 { width:154.72pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block } THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 17497/02 by Vasilijs RUDAKOVS against Latvia The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 19   January 2010 as a Chamber composed of: Josep Casadevall, President, Elisabet Fura, Boštjan M. Zupančič, Alvina Gyulumyan, Ineta Ziemele, Luis López Guerra, Ann Power, judges, and Santiago Quesada, Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 19 March 2002, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The application was lodged by Mr Vasilijs Rudakovs, who is a Latvian national born in 1959 and who is currently serving a prison sentence in the Central Prison in Rīga. He is represented before the Court by Mr   U.   Beinarovičs, a lawyer practising in Rīga. The Latvian Government (“the Government”) are represented by their Agent, Mrs I.   Reine. The applicant’s complaints concerning the conditions of detention in places of detention in Daugavpils and Rīga and the adequacy of medical treatment received by him while in detention, the alleged interference with his family life and with respect for his correspondence, as well as the alleged interference with his freedom of religion were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant, who was, invited to submit his own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter. On 5 May 2009 the applicant appointed a representative. The period allowed for submission of the applicant’s observations was extended until 14 July 2009. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter in that regard. By letters dated 24 August and 8 October 2009, sent by registered post, the applicant’s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of the applicant’s observations had expired on 14 July 2009 and that no further extension of time had been requested. The applicant’s representative’s attention was drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike a case out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. The applicant’s representative received these letters on 27 August and 13 October 2009. However, no response has been received. THE LAW   The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue his application, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. 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 continued examination of the case. In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.   Santiago Quesada   Josep Casadevall   Registrar   President