CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 12 décembre 2017

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .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 } .s39A7D870 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sBB355983 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .s4B243ECC { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s5F897A7E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s7E985A65 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; font-size:1pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sFCAD7A46 { width:199.27pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s8F670191 { font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; list-style-position:inside } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s85646119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:12pt } .s4EFEAD { width:14.32pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block }     FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 42192/11 Adrian RÓŻNICKI against Poland and 28 other applications (see list appended) The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 12   December 2017 as a Committee composed of:   Aleš Pejchal, President,   Krzysztof Wojtyczek,   Armen Harutyunyan, judges, and Renata Degener, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table, Having regard to the declarations submitted by the respondent Government on 7 December 2015, 6 July and 3 November 2016, and on 13   July 2017 requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases and the applicants’ reply to that declarations, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE 1.     A list of the applicants is set out in the appendix. 2.     The Polish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms J. Chrzanowska, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 3.     All the applicants complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the excessive length of proceedings in their cases and under Article 13   of the Convention about the lack of, or insufficient, redress for the excessive length of proceedings granted to them by the national courts. 4.     On 7 July 2015 the applications were communicated to the Polish Government pursuant to Rule 54 § 2 (b) of the Rules of Court, by virtue of the ninth operative provision of the pilot-judgment given in the case of Rutkowski and Others v. Poland (see Rutkowski and Others v. Poland , nos.   72287/10 and 2 others, §§ 223-228 and the ninth operative provision, 7   July 2015). 5.     By letters dated 7 December 2015, 6 July and 3 November 2016, and 13   July 2017 the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make declarations with a view to resolving the issues raised by the applications. In each case the Government acknowledged a violation of Article 6 §   1 on account of the excessive length of proceedings and violation of Article 13 on account of the lack of an effective remedy, securing sufficient redress for a violation of Article   6 § 1. They offered payment of sums specified in respect of each applicant in a table appended to their declarations. The Government further undertook to adopt a range of general measures in respect of other persons who were victims of similar violations or might be affected by similar violations in the future. The sums referred to above, which are specified in the appendix to the decision, are to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, will be free of any taxes that may be applicable. They will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the Convention. In the event of failure to pay these sums within the said three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on each of them, from expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default periods plus three percentage points. In addition, the Government made a declaration on general measures to be adopted in implementation of the Rutkowski and Others pilot judgment (see Załuska and Rogalska v. Poland and 398 other applications (dec.), nos. 53491/10 and 72286/10, §§ 23-25, 20   June 2017). They further requested the Court to strike out the applications in accordance with Article   37 of the Convention. THE LAW 6.     Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision. 7.     On various dates in 2017 all applicants indicated that they were not satisfied with the terms of the unilateral declarations. 8.     The Court reiterates that Article   37 of the Convention provides that it may at any stage of the proceedings decide to strike an application out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to one of the conclusions specified, under (a), (b) or (c) of paragraph 1 of that Article. Article   37   §   1   (c) enables the Court in particular to strike a case out of its list if: “for any other reason established by the Court, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application”. 9.     It also reiterates that in certain circumstances, it may strike out an application under Article   37   §   1   (c) on the basis of a unilateral declaration by a respondent Government even if the applicants wish the examination of the case to be continued. 10.     To this end, the Court has examined the declarations in the light of the principles emerging from its case-law, in particular the Tahsin Acar judgment ( Tahsin Acar v. Turkey (preliminary objections) [GC], no.   26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; WAZA Sp. z o.o. v. Poland (dec.), no.   11602/02, 26   June   2007; and Sulwińska v. Poland (dec.), no. 28953/03, 18   September   2007). 11.     The conclusions reached by the Court on admissions and undertakings contained in the Government’s declarations in the first group of 400 cases submitted in the pilot-judgment procedure apply to the present case (see Załuska and Rogalska (dec), cited above, §§ 51-53). 12.     Having regard to the nature of the admissions contained in the Government’s declarations, as well as the amount of compensation proposed – which is consistent with the amounts awarded in similar cases – the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the applications (Article   37   §   1   (c)). 13.     Moreover, in light of the above considerations, and in particular given the clear and extensive case-law on the topic, the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the applications (Article 37 § 1 in fine ). 14.     Finally, the Court emphasises that, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declarations, the applications could be restored to the list in accordance with Article   37 § 2 of the Convention ( Josipović v. Serbia (dec.), no. 18369/07, 4   March 2008). 15.     In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government’s declarations under Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention and of the modalities for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein; Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article   37   §   1   (c) of the Convention.   Done in English and notified in writing on 11 January 2018. Renata Degener   Aleš Pejchal Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX   No. Application no. Lodged on Applicant Date of birth Place of residence Represented by Introduced by Amount proposed in Unilateral Declaration   42192/11 01/07/2011 Adrian RÓŻNICKI 13/06/1982 Łódź     Adrian Różnicki PLN 3,710   4053/11 09/12/2010 Mariusz MIŚ 23/07/1969 Opole   Aleksandra CEMPURA Mariusz Miś PLN 32,400   63202/11 30/09/2011 Grażyna NIEMIAŁTOWSKA 14/08/1943 Warsaw   Marek NIEMIAŁTOWSKI 29/03/1945   Dominika NIEMIAŁTOWSKA continues in her father’s stead.   Grażyna Niemiałtowska       Marek Niemiałtowski     Dominika Niemiałtowska PLN 7,720 for all applicants     20030/12 26/03/2012 Arkadiusz JASTRZĘBSKI 20/06/1975 Lublin       Arkadiusz Jastrzębski PLN 21,840   20319/12 16/03/2012 Przemysław Rafał BORECKI 17/12/1977 Warsaw       Przemysław Rafał Borecki PLN 11,100     24100/12 06/04/2012 Stefan MAJEWSKI 30/04/1944 Warsaw         Stefan Majewski PLN 40,800     60164/12 03/09/2012 Dariusz KRZYSIAK 19/10/1974 Bujaków Klaudiusz KRZYSIAK 27/04/1972 Bujaków Stanisław KRZYSIAK 20/03/1948 Bujaków     Dariusz Krzysiak     Klaudiusz Krzysiak     Stanisław Krzysiak   PLN 20,985 for all applicants     61636/12 10/09/2012 Tomasz STOJAŃSKI 22/09/1982 Koszalin       Tomasz Stojański PLN 6,240   68215/12 01/10/2012 Adam Piotr CHOBA 13/03/1978 Przytuły Stare           Adam Piotr Choba PLN 2,420             80449/12 28/11/2012 Henryka Teresa CICHA-GNYP 17/12/1958 Łódź Maciej Gnyp 11/02/1993 Łódź       Henryka Teresa Cicha- Gnyp     Maciej Gnyp PLN 24,800 for all applicants             63053/13 17/04/2012 Krzysztof JASIŃSKI 15/10/1958 Mysłowice   Maciej SCHIPERSKI Krzysztof Jasiński PLN 39,670             71200/13 30/10/2013 Ryszard ZIELIŃSKI 31/12/1955 Warsaw     Ryszard Zieliński PLN 6,100             72284/13 05/11/2013 Marcin CELEJEWSKI 29/05/1984 Będzin       Marcin Celejewski PLN 9,010             73161/13 26/07/2013 Artur KUJAWA 18/08/1971 Warsaw     Artur Kujawa PLN 30,220             79971/13 08/05/2014 Adrian CERAN 16/07/1991 Gębarzewo     Adrian Ceran PLN 4,680             2247/14 23/12/2013 Mariusz KUCHARCZYK 20/04/1965 Zebrzydowice   Mariola KUCIŃSKA-TEKLIŃSKA Mariusz Kucharczyk PLN 16,720             2298/14 23/12/2013 Mariusz FOLTYN 24/03/1973 Kończyce Wielkie   Mariola KUCIŃSKA-TEKLIŃSKA Mariusz Foltyn PLN 16,720             10059/14 18/12/2013 Włodzimierz MŁYNARSKI 22/12/1950 Słubice     Włodzimierz Młynarski PLN 18,720             10413/14 17/01/2014 Dariusz KUDEŃ 28/12/1960 Suben     Dariusz Kudeń PLN 12,355 for the first set of proceedings; PLN 7,990 for the second set of proceedings.             29417/14 27/10/2014 Adam KANKOWSKI 13/11/1974 Gdańsk     Adam Kankowski PLN 36,430 for the first set of proceedings; PLN 39,340 for the second set of proceedings             38059/14 06/05/2014 Artur KAZIKOWSKI 17/03/1979 Kamińsk       Artur Kazikowski PLN 7,360             38768/14 07/05/2014 Jan Paweł KĘPKA 04/10/1982 Warsaw     Jan Paweł Kępka PLN 4,400             56629/14 21/07/2014 Andrzej ZALEWSKI 28/10/1978 Krzywaniec   Andrzej Zalewski PLN 2,020             60210/14 28/08/2014 Jerzy KOSZEWSKI 19/06/1949 Olsztyn Tomasz KOSZEWSKI Jerzy Koszewski PLN 35,440             60267/14 30/09/2014 Zbigniew GAWĘCKI 25/02/1964 Warsaw   Zbigniew Gawęcki PLN 20,570             65359/14 19/09/2014 Ernest SKURAT 06/08/1977 Gdańsk   Ernest Skurat PLN 3,980             71858/14 06/11/2014 Józef Bronisław JĘDRUCH 10/01/1972 Częstochowa Michał PAPROCKI Józef Bronisław Jędruch PLN 20,580             10139/15 19/02/2015 Paweł STRELEC 22/10/1982 Hrubieszów   Paweł Strelec PLN 8,040             15287/15 23/03/2015 Janusz OLEWIŃSKI 13/09/1953 Siedlce     Janusz Olewiński PLN 4,200