CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 17 mars 2016

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s4B243ECC { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s5F897A7E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s7E985A65 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; font-size:1pt } .sE2BDF40E { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:28.35pt; text-align:left } .s22A16B87 { width:155.27pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sB62BA9AD { width:168.28pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .sAC521AF { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s8F670191 { font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; list-style-position:inside } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }     FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 71196/13 George GRĂDINARU against Romania and 2 other applications (see list appended) The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 17   March 2016 as a Committee composed of:   Vincent A. De Gaetano, President,   Egidijus Kūris,   Gabriele Kucsko-Stadlmayer, judges, and Hasan Bakırcı, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE A list of the applicants is set out in the appendix. The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs C. Brumar, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The applicants complained under Article 3 of the Convention about the inadequate conditions of detention in several detention facilities in Romania. The applicants’ complaints under Article 3 of the Convention were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded for information to the applicants, who were invited to submit their claims under Article 41. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter. By letter dated 21 December 2015, sent by registered post, the applicants were notified that the period allowed for submission of their claims had expired on 1 September 2015 and 30 September 2015 respectively and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicants’ 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 applicants received this letter on 8 January 2016 and 11 January 2016 respectively. However, no response has been received. THE LAW Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision. The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicants may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue their applications, 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 cases. In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases.   Done in English and notified in writing on 7 April 2016. Hasan Bakırcı   Vincent A. De Gaetano Acting Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX No Application No. Lodged on Applicant Date of birth Place of residence   71196/13 07/11/2013 George GRĂDINARU 24/09/1985 Șendreni, Galați County     40206/14 25/06/2014 Ionuț Dănuț COSTACHE 16/01/1987 Slobozia     41073/14 24/06/2014 Samir PANEA 29/06/1986 Drobeta Turnu Severin