CEDHCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG28
CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 5 juillet 2011
- ECLI
- ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0705DEC002671510
- Date
- 5 juillet 2011
- Publication
- 5 juillet 2011
droits fondamentauxCEDH
Source : DILA / Judilibre · open data
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulRésumé structuré
version préliminaireFaits
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Procédure
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Question juridique
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Solution
source officielleStruck out of the list
Résumé généré automatiquement — à vérifier avec la décision originale.
Analyse IA non disponible
Générez un résumé intelligent de cette décision
Texte intégral
.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .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 } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s9D48DD53 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .sA14A683B { font-family:Arial; letter-spacing:0.3pt } .s185E4AB9 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic; letter-spacing:0.3pt } .sA945683B { font-family:Arial; letter-spacing:0.2pt } .sBB05BF54 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic; letter-spacing:0.2pt } .s88A92475 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sDD165512 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sF8DCB537 { width:16.53pt; display:inline-block } .s10C4BC3A { width:167.08pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block } FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 26715/10 by Mariusz WINKLEWSKI against Poland The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 5   July   2011 as a Committee composed of:   Zdravka Kalaydjieva, President,   Lech Garlicki,   Nebojša Vučinić, judges, and Lawrence Early, Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 26   April 2010, Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case, Having deliberated, decides as follows: PROCEDURE The applicant, Mr   Mariusz Winklewski, is a Polish national who was born in 1983 and lives in Kwidzyń. The Polish Government (“the   Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr   J.   Wołąsiewicz of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. On 28   March 2011 the President of the Fourth Section of the Court decided to communicate the applicant’s complaint under Article   3 of the Convention concerning the conditions of his detention. THE LAW On 18   April 2011 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant: “I, Mariusz Winklewski, 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   14,000   (fourteen thousand Polish zlotys), plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant. I further note that the payment constitutes redress for the systemic violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the conditions of my detention, in particular overcrowding, as identified by the Court in the pilot judgment given in the case of Orchowski v.   Poland (no.   17885/04) on 22   October 2009 (see paragraphs   135 and   147 et   seq.). 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 6 June 2011 the Court received the following declaration from the Government: “I, Jakub Wołąsiewicz, Agent of the Government, declare that the Government of Poland offer to pay to Mr   Mariusz Winklewski, 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. The payment is intended to provide the applicant with redress for the systemic violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the conditions of his detention, in particular overcrowding, as identified by the Court in the pilot judgment given in the case of Orchowski v.   Poland (no.   17885/04) on 22   October 2009 (see paragraphs   135   and   147 et   seq.). 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   Zdravka Kalaydjieva   Registrar   President  Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
- Formation
- 28
- Date
- 5 juillet 2011
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0705DEC002671510
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral