CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 11 décembre 2001

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5BA5B7C7 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s662121A1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .sB8987CE9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .s61ED8A2B { width:14.36pt; display:inline-block } .s61E420C2 { font-family:Arial; font-variant:small-caps } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s84D0D60A { width:8.36pt; display:inline-block } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s1E56514F { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; font-size:14pt } .s58B8AE49 { clear:both; mso-column-break-before:always } .sBB5E682E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sF604F523 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; font-size:14pt } .s145CCEB3 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCC0049A1 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:21.3pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:7.05pt; font-size:10pt } .s32335BFC { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:21.3pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:7.05pt } .s2F5E82D6 { font-family:Arial; background-color:#00ff00 } .s377C1984 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sA918FEC8 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.4pt } .sBED5F98F { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:36pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sEF8F76C5 { width:20.87pt; display:inline-block } .s51BFCD5E { width:209.13pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .s60570E66 { width:233.81pt; display:inline-block } THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 52072/99 by Zygmunt BOROWSKI against Poland The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 11   December 2001 as a Chamber composed of   Mr   G. Ress , President ,   Mr   I. Cabral Barreto ,   Mr   P. Kūris ,   Mr   B. Zupančič ,   Mr   J. Hedigan ,   Mrs   M. Tsatsa - Nikolovska ,   Mr   K. Traja , judges , and Mr V. Berger , Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 18 February 1999 and registered on 22 October 1999, Having regard to the written submissions of the parties, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant,   Zygmunt Borowski, is a Polish national, who was born in 1945 and lives in Poznań. The respondent Government were represented by their Agent Mr Krzysztof Drzewicki, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. On 28 November 1990 a certain Ms X filed with the Poznań Regional Court ( Sąd Wojewódzki ) an action in which she sought the eviction of the applicant and his wife from the premises in which they ran their hairdresser’s shop and the payment of a certain sum. On 21 February 1991 the applicant made a counterclaim against Ms X. On 15 November 1991 Ms X amended her claims. In September 1992 an expert opinion was issued. In December 1992 and August 1995 supplementary opinions were prepared. In April 1996 another expert issued an opinion. In October 1996 a supplementary opinion was issued. On 13 May 1997 the court gave judgment. It awarded both parties certain amounts of money. On 19 May 1997 the applicant and his wife submitted their notice of appeal. On 23 February 1998 the copy of the judgment with the written reasoning was served on them and they subsequently appealed. On 23 June 1998 the Poznań Court of Appeal ( Sąd Apelacyjny ) dismissed their appeal. The copy of that judgment with the reasoning was served on the applicant’s lawyer on 3 September 1998. COMPLAINT The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that   the proceedings had exceeded a reasonable time. THE LAW On 28 June 2001 the Court decided to communicate the application to the respondent Government. On 31 October 2001 the Court received the following declaration from the respondent Government: “I declare that the Government of the Republic of Poland offer to pay to Mr Zygmunt BOROWSKI a sum of 9 500 (nine thousand five hundred) PLN with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the application no. 52072/99 pending before the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. This sum shall cover any eventual pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs, and it will be payable to the applicant after signing the declarations by the parties concerned, however not later than three months after the notification of the decision delivered by the Court pursuant to Article 39 of the European Convention on Human Rights. This payment will constitute the final resolution of the case. I declare at the same time that the offer of the above-mentioned amount has been made in connection with duration of the proceedings in the applicant’s case before the organs of the Polish judiciary. This declaration does not entail any acknowledgement by the Government of a violation of the European Convention on Human Rights in the present case. I further undertake not to request the reference of the case to the Grand Chamber under Article 43 § 1 of the European Convention.”   On 21 November 2001 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant: “I note hereby that the Government of the Republic of Poland are prepared to pay to me a sum of 9 500 (nine thousand five hundred) PLN covering any eventual pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the application no. 52072/99 pending before the European Court of Human Rights. This payment will constitute the final resolution of the case under the terms stipulated in the Declaration of the Government Agent. I further undertake not to request the reference of the case to the Grand Chamber under Article 43 § 1 of the European Convention.”   The Court takes note of the agreement reached between the parties and considers that the matter has been resolved (Article 37 § 1 (b) of the Convention). It is satisfied that respect for human rights does not require the continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine ). Accordingly, the application should be struck out of the list. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.   Vincent Berger   Georg Ress   Registrar   President