CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 13 novembre 2018

.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 } .s7E985A65 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; font-size:1pt } .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 } .s5F897A7E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s28BDCFEA { width:6.53pt; display:inline-block } .s172EF8F1 { width:208.76pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block }     FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 75140/12 Ioannis ROUSSIS against Greece   The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 13   November 2018 as a Committee composed of:   Aleš Pejchal, President,   Tim Eicke,   Jovan Ilievski, judges, and Abel Campos, Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 9 November 2012, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE 1.     The applicant, Mr Ioannis Roussis, a Greek national, was born in   1958 and lived in Bretten, Germany. He was represented before the Court initially by Mr G. Arbis and Mr T. Nakos, lawyers practising in Athens and Volos respectively and later solely by Mr T. Nakos. 2.     The Greek Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent’s delegate, Ms G. Papadaki, Senior Advisor at the State Legal Council. 3.     The applicant complained under Article 6 of the Convention that he was deprived of his right of access to a court on account of his not being able to challenge the decision delivered against him in absentia unless he surrendered himself to custody or was arrested. He also complained of a violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 7 on the grounds that domestic legislation, as in force at the relevant time, prohibited appeals by persons who had been convicted in absentia. 4.     On 10 July 2017 the Court decided to give notice to the Government of the applicant’s complaints detailed above. 5.     On 18 December 2017 the Government submitted to the Registry their observations on the admissibility and merits of the application. These were forwarded on 5 January to the applicant, who was invited to submit observations in reply by 16 February 2018. The applicant failed to respond to the last Registry’s letters of 7 March and 23 July 2018, reminding him that the period allowed for submission of his observations in reply had expired on 16 February 2018 and that no extension of time had been requested. His attention was drawn to Article   37   §   1   (a) of the Convention. 6.     On 19 September 2018 the death of the applicant was communicated to the Registry. No heirs presented themselves to pursue the procedure. THE LAW In the light of the foregoing, the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application within the meaning of Article   37   §   1   (c) of the Convention. 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. Done in English and notified in writing on 6 December 2018.   Abel Campos   Aleš Pejchal   Registrar   President