CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 7 octobre 2021

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sF920FE69 { font-family:Arial; color:#f8f8f8 } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s241E80BF { width:7.44pt; display:inline-block } .s55BEF4F4 { width:156.09pt; display:inline-block } .sC30055DD { width:0.44pt; display:inline-block } .sB136BB97 { width:166.44pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s6186A45 { width:104.38%; border-collapse:collapse } .s1B5E5BBA { width:7.2%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE7593841 { width:17.46%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s5B1078AF { width:27.84%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s34E48096 { width:16.58%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s901A8E1D { width:30.9%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sD604ECD3 { width:7.2%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sE50CC373 { width:17.46%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s980143DB { width:27.84%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s8A991E5E { width:16.58%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sE6DDAC9F { width:30.9%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top }   SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 22339/20 Sami SAYIN against Turkey and 5 other applications (see appended table)   The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 7   October 2021 as a Committee composed of:   Branko Lubarda, President,   Pauliine Koskelo,   Marko Bošnjak, judges, and Viktoriya Maradudina, 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 The list of the applicants is set out in the appendix. The applicants were represented by Ms. Ö. Teke, a lawyer practising in Ankara. The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, Articles 13 and 14 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention concerning the non-enforcement of domestic judgments ordering the applicants’ appointment as labour auditors were communicated to the Turkish Government (“the Government”). On 25   June 2021 the applicants informed the Registry that they wanted to withdraw the applications to the Court as they have been appointed as labour auditors. 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 further concludes, in the light of the foregoing, that the applicants may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue the applications (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 the Protocols thereto which require the continued examination of the applications. Accordingly, the cases should be struck 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 28 October 2021.   {signature_p_2}   Viktoriya Maradudina   Branko Lubarda   Acting Deputy Registrar   President   APPENDIX List of applications     No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality 1. 22339/20 Sayın v. Turkey 04/06/2020 Sami SAYIN 1987 Istanbul Turkish 2. 22345/20 Şen v. Turkey 04/06/2020 Ebru ŞEN 1988 Izmir Turkish 3. 22349/20 Demir v. Turkey 04/06/2020 Gül DEMİR 1981 Izmir Turkish 4. 22354/20 Önal v. Turkey 04/06/2020 İsa Adalet ÖNAL 1985 Istanbul Turkish 5. 22466/20 Arık Aşci v. Turkey 04/06/2020 Nurhan ARIK AŞCİ 1982 Ankara Turkish 6. 22601/20 Taşdelen v. Turkey 04/06/2020 Serhat TAŞDELEN 1985 Istanbul Turkish