CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 31 mars 2022

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sD37F5C3B { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } Published on 19 April 2022   FIRST SECTION Application no. 1470/22 Grzegorz BURCHARD against Poland lodged on 22 December 2021 communicated on 31 March 2022 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicant was a barrister. On 21 February 2020 the Łódź Bar Chamber Disciplinary Court ( Sąd Dyscyplinarny Izby Adwokackiej w Łodzi ) imposed a disciplinary penalty on the applicant. The applicant was disbarred ( wydalenie z adwokatury ) for having breached the Code of Bar Ethics in that he had given false information to a public notary. The applicant’s appeal was dismissed on 4 July 2020 by the High Disciplinary Court of the Bar ( Wyższy Sąd Dyscylinarny Adwokatury ). The applicant lodged a cassation appeal with the Supreme Court. Relying on the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 19 November 2019 (Joined Cases C-585/18, C-624/18 and C-625/18), he also lodged a request, which had not been examined, to exclude judges of the Disciplinary Chamber from siting in the case. The Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court held two hearings and on 23   June 2021 dismissed the applicant’s cassation appeal (sitting as a panel of three judges of the Disciplinary Chamber, T.P., K.W., and R.W., case no.   II DK 54/21). The applicant complains that the Disciplinary Chamber was not an “independent and impartial tribunal established by law” in breach of Article   6 §   1 of the Convention.   QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Was the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court which dealt with the applicant’s case an “independent and impartial tribunal established by law” as required by Article   6 §   1 of the Convention? Reference is made to the Court’s judgments in Reczkowicz v.   Poland , no.   43447/19, 22 July 2021 §§ 225-284 and Guðmundur Andri Ástráðsson v.   Iceland [GC], no. 26374/18, 1 December 2020, §§ 205-290.