CEDHCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG28
CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 1 juillet 2014
- ECLI
- ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:0701DEC002521313
- Date
- 1 juillet 2014
- Publication
- 1 juillet 2014
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 } .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 } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sF7A86111 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; font-size:10pt } .s39A7D870 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s4B243ECC { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s959B95E9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sF3B96856 { width:11.87pt; display:inline-block } .s6667B4BF { width:213.78pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block }   FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 25213/13 Jarosław PAWLICZAK against Poland The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 1   July   2014 as a Committee composed of:   Päivi Hirvelä, President,   Nona Tsotsoria,   Faris Vehabović, judges, and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 27 March 2013, Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case, Having deliberated, decides as follows: PROCEDURE The applicant, Mr   Jarosław Pawliczak, is a Polish national, who was born in 1968 and is detained in Wronki. He was represented before the Court by Mr   Piotr Rał, a lawyer practising in Warsaw. The Polish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms   Justyna Chrzanowska, Agent of the Government. The applicant complains under Article   3 of the Convention about overcrowding and inadequate living conditions during his detention in Poznań Detention Centre from 27   November 2007 until February 2008 and Wronki Prison from February 2008 until March 2009 and from June 2009 to 2   June 2011. THE LAW On 8   April 2014 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant: “I, Piotr Rał, note that the Government of Poland are prepared to pay to   Jarosław Pawliczak, with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights, PLN   24,000 (twenty ‑ four thousand Polish zlotys), to cover any and all pecuniary and non ‑ pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, 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 the applicant’s 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 taken by the Court to strike the case out of its list of cases. 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. Having consulted my client, I would inform you that he accepts the proposal and waives any further claims against Poland in respect of the facts giving rise to this application. He declares that this constitutes a final resolution of the case.” On 17   April 2014 the Court received the following declaration from the Government: “I, Justyna Chrzanowska, Agent of the Government, declare that the Government of Poland offer to pay to Jarosław Pawliczak, with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights PLN   24,000 (twenty-four thousand Polish zlotys) to cover any and all pecuniary and non ‑ pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, 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 taken by the Court to strike the case out of its list of cases. 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. 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 in accordance with Article   39 of the Convention.   Fatoş Aracı   Päivi Hirvelä Deputy Registrar   PresidentCitations
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
- 1 juillet 2014
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:0701DEC002521313
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral