FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
PILOT-JUDGMENT PROCEDURE
Application no. 16751/08
by Izabela SADURA and Others
against Poland
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 23 September 2008 as a Chamber composed of:
and 
Having regard to the above application lodged on 28 March 2008,
Having regard to the decision to apply the pilot-judgment procedure and to adjourn its consideration of applications deriving from the same systemic problem identified in the case of Broniowski v. Poland (no. 31443/96),
Having regard to the decisions to strike the applications Wolkenberg and Others v. Poland (no. 50003/99) and Witkowska-Toboła v. Poland (no. 11208/02) out of the Court’s list of cases,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicants, Ms Izabela Sadura (“the first applicant”), Ms Izabela Plucińska (“the second applicant”) and Ms Barbara Łętowska (“the third applicant”), are Polish nationals who were born in 1924, 1947 and 1950 respectively and live in Zielona Góra.
A.  Historical background to Bug River cases before the Court
(See E.G. v. Poland, no. 50425/99, §§ 2-5).
B.  Particular circumstances of case no. 16751/08
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows.
On 29 March 1991 the Zielona Góra Regional Court (Sąd Wojewódzki) gave a declaratory judgment stating that the applicants’ family had owned real property in the territories beyond the Bug River.
On an unspecified date the applicants asked the Zielona Góra District Office (Urząd Rejonowy) to enable them to acquire State property in compensation for the property abandoned by their family in the territories beyond the Bug River.
On 20 December 1990 the authorities informed them that their claim had been entered in the relevant register pending its realisation.
On 1 February 2002 the Mayor of Zielona Góra (Prezydent Miasta) issued a decision confirming that the applicants had the right to compensation for the property abandoned by their family, valued at 296,800 Polish zlotys (PLN). It emerges from that decision that the first applicant is entitled to one half and the second and third applicants to one quarter of the sum.
The applicants’ subsequent attempts to acquire State property were unsuccessful. The only possibility of enforcing the claim was to participate in competitive bids for the sale of State property. However, the State authorities throughout Poland officially acknowledged the acute shortage of State-owned land designated for the realisation of the Bug River claims.
This fact and the fact that at the material time it was the authorities’ common practice to desist from organising auctions for Bug River claimants or to openly deny them the opportunity to enforce their entitlement through the statutory bidding procedure was established by the Court in the Broniowski judgment (see Broniowski, cited above, §§ 48-61, 69-87 and 168-176).
On 3 April 2006 the applicants initiated proceedings under the Law on the realisation of the right to compensation for property left beyond the present borders of the Polish State (Ustawa o realizacji prawa do rekompensaty z tytułu pozostawienia nieruchomości poza obecnymi granicami państwa polskiego) (“the July 2005 Act”) in order to obtain compensation for the Bug River property. The proceedings are apparently still pending.
C.  Relevant domestic law and practice in respect of Bug River claims
(See E.G. v. Poland, no. 50425/99, §§ 16-17).
COMPLAINT
(See E.G. v. Poland, no. 50425/99, § 18).
THE LAW
(See E.G. v. Poland, no. 50425/99, §§ 19-29).
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
1.  Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases;
2.  Decides to close the pilot-judgment procedure applied in respect of the Bug River applications in the case of Broniowski v. Poland (no. 31443/96).
	Lawrence Early	Nicolas Bratza
	Registrar	President