[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	European Court of Human Rights
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Czeslawa WOLSKA v Poland - 36707/04 [2012] ECHR 580 (20 March 2012) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2012/580.html Cite as: [2012] ECHR 580

[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

FOURTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 36707/04
Czesława WOLSKA
against Poland

The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 20 March 2012 as a Chamber composed of:

David Thór Björgvinsson, President,
Lech Garlicki,
Päivi Hirvelä,
George Nicolaou,
Ledi Bianku,
Zdravka Kalaydjieva,
Vincent A. De Gaetano, judges,
and Lawrence Early, Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 10 September 2004,

Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

PROCEDURE

The applicant, Ms Czesława Wolska, was a Polish national who was born in 1948 and lived in Strzelce Opolskie. On 27 October 2011 the Registry was informed that the applicant had died. On 5 January 2012 Mr Janusz Ptasiński, the applicant’s husband and heir informed the Court that he wished to pursue the application. The Polish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr J. Wołąsiewicz of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that, as a result of gross negligence of her legal-aid lawyer and the actions of the courts, she was deprived of access to court. The applicant’s appeal, lodged consistently with the information note provided to her by the trial court, was rejected as having been lodged outside the prescribed time-limit because the trial court, when examining the appeal lodged personally by the applicant, took into account the date on which the judgment with reasoning was served on the applicant’s lawyer.

THE LAW

On 5 January 2012 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant:

“I, Janusz Ptasiński, heir of the deceased applicant, Ms Czesława Wolska, note that the Government of Poland are prepared to pay me, with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights, PLN 14,0000 (fourteen thousand Polish zlotys), plus any tax that may be chargeable to me.

This sum will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. From the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

I accept the proposal and waive any further claims against Poland in respect of the facts giving rise to this application. I declare that this constitutes a final resolution of the case.”

On 3 February 2012 the Court received the following declaration from the Government:

“I, Jakub Wołąsiewicz, Agent of the Polish Government, declare that the Government of Poland offer to pay, to Mr Janusz Ptasiński, Ms Czesława Wolska’s heir, with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights, PLN 14,000 (fourteen thousand Polish zlotys), plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant.

This sum will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three-month period, the Government undertake to pay simple interest on it, from expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The payment will constitute the final resolution of the case.”

The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine 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.

Lawrence Early David Thór Björgvinsson
Registrar President