CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 4 juillet 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 } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s65E06E64 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s5FFF0A7F { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:9pt } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s85226119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } Published on 25 July 2022   FIRST SECTION Application no. 48534/20 Julita ZIELIŃSKA against Poland and 11 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 4 July 2022 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASES The applicants were parties to civil proceedings concerning various claims or had criminal proceedings instituted against them. All applicants had their cases examined by a court of first or second instance in a formation including judges appointed to those courts by the President of Poland pursuant to the recommendations of the National Council of the Judiciary ( Krajowa Rada Sądownictwa , “the NCJ”) as established under the Amending Act on the NCJ and certain other statutes of 8 December 2017 ( ustawa o zmianie ustawy o Krajowej Radzie Sądownictwa oraz niektórych innych ustaw ; “the 2017 Act”). The applicants complain that their cases were examined by judicial formations of the ordinary courts including newly appointed judges which gave rise to a violation of their right to an “independent and impartial tribunal established by law”, in breach of Article   6 § 1 of the Convention. In addition, in the case Nawrot v. Poland (51529/21) the applicant complains about unreasonable length of civil proceedings and lack of effective remedy in this respect, and the applicants in the case Lubomirska and Puzyna v. Poland (18422/21) about the unreasonable length of administrative proceedings.   QUESTION TO THE PARTIES – ALL CASES 1.     Was the court which dealt with the applicants’ cases an “independent and impartial tribunal established by law” as required by Article   6 §   1 of the Convention?   Reference is made to the fact that the applicants’ cases were examined by a formation of ordinary courts composed of judges appointed in the procedure established by the Law of 8 December 2017 Amending the Act on the National Council of the Judiciary. In their replies, the parties are asked to refer to the Court’s judgments in Advance Pharma sp. z o.o v.   Poland , no.   1469/20, 3   February 2022 and Guðmundur Andri Ástráðsson v. Iceland [GC], no. 26374/18, §§ 205-290, 1 December 2020. ADDITIONAL QUESTION IN Lubomirska and Puzyna (18422/21) 2.     Was the length of the administrative proceedings in the present case in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement of Article   6 §   1 of the Convention (the period to be taken into consideration started on 29/05/2012, see Wcisło and Cabaj v. Poland , nos.   49725/11 and 79950/13, § 173, 8   November 2018)? ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS IN Nawrot v. Poland (51529/21) 3.     Was the length of the civil proceedings in the present case in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement of Article   6 §   1 of the Convention (see Rutkowski and Others v. Poland , nos. 72287/10 and 2 others, 7 July 2015)?   4.     Did the applicant have at his disposal an effective domestic remedy for his complaint under Article 6 § 1 concerning the unreasonable length of the proceedings under the 2004 Act, as required by Article 13 of the Convention?     APPENDIX   No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality Represented by Subject and summary of domestic proceedings 1. 48534/20 Zielińska v.   Poland 28/10/2020 Julita ZIELIŃSKA 1991 Szczecin Polish Paweł Wacław ZACHARZEWSKI On 28/05/2019 the Szczecin – Centrum District Court convicted the applicant of fraud. The applicant appealed. On 28/01/2020 the Szczecin Regional Court upheld the conviction. It sat in a single judge formation, composed of judge J.W. appointed to that court by the President of Poland on 10/06/2019, on recommendation of NCJ (resolution of 13/12/2018, no. 633/2018).     2. 18422/21 Lubomirska and Puzyna v. Poland 19/03/2021 Maria Izabela LUBOMIRSKA 1925 Sierra Madre Polish Julian PUZYNA 1967 Berkshire Polish Józef FORYSTEK The applicants applied for compensation for the so-called “Bug River” property. On 11/05/2012 the Mazowiecki Governor issued decision refusing the request. On 29/05/2012 the applicants appealed. On 5 September 2014 the Mazowiecki Governor dismissed the applicant’s request for compensation. The ruling was quashed upon appeal by the Minister of Treasury on 27/11/2014. The proceedings before the administrative authorities continued until the final decision of the Minister of Treasury of 27/09/2018 which dismissed their claim for compensation. On 22/3/2019 the Regional Administrative Court upheld the Minister’s decision. The applicants appealed. On 08/12/2020 the Supreme Administrative Court gave judgment finally dismissing the applicants’ claim (served on the applicant’s lawyer on 20/01/2021). It sat in a formation of three judges including judge M.W. appointed to that court by the President of Poland on 3/04/2019, on recommendation of the NCJ (resolution of 8/11/2018, no. 531/2018). The applicants lodged two complaints about the excessive length of administrative proceedings; on 29/10/2013 the Minister of the State Treasury allowed the complaint and ordered the Governor to issue a decision within four months; on 27/06/2014 the Warsaw Regional Administrative Court found that the proceedings were excessively lengthy and order the Governor to issue a decision.     3. 28314/21 Szulc v. Poland 12/05/2021 Michał SZULC 1962 Sopot Polish   On 30/12/2019 the applicant instituted divorce proceedings before the Gdansk Regional Court. The case was assigned to Judge W. B-K., appointed to that court by the President of Poland on 19/09/2019 on recommendation of the NCJ (resolution of 27/06/2019, no. 638/2019). On 11/02/2020 the applicant applied for a recusal of the judge. The request was dismissed by the Chamber of Extraordinary Review and Public Affairs on 19/05/2020. On 16/11/2020 the Gdansk Regional Court pronounced the applicant’s divorce. It sat in a formation of two lay judges and judge W. B-K. The applicant did not appeal against this judgment.     4. 32097/21 Dzięgała v. Poland 18/06/2021 Sławomir DZIĘGAŁA 1977 Radzionków Polish Anna TROCKA On 11/09/2019 the Częstochowa Regional Court convicted the applicant for fraud and sentenced him to 2 years’ imprisonment and a fine. On 14/02/2020 the Katowice Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s appeal. It sat in a formation of three judges including judge M.C. appointed to that court by the President of Poland on 16/10/2019, on recommendation of the NCJ (resolution of 11/12/2018, no. 625/2018). In his cassation appeal, the applicant complained about the composition of the appellate court. On 18/11/2020 the Supreme Court dismissed the applicant’s cassation appeal as manifestly ill-founded.     5. 35535/21 Janik v. Poland 28/06/2021 Teresa JANIK 1959 Zdziechowice Polish Lesław SZPALA In 2014 the applicant was indicted before the Lublin Regional Court. On 2/03/2020 the Lublin Regional Court convicted the applicant for embezzlement of municipal assets. The applicant’s appeal was dismissed by the Lublin Court of Appeal on 24/09/2020 (served on 29/12/2020). It sat in a single judge formation composed of judge A.P. appointed to that court by the President of Poland on 16/10/2019, on recommendation of the NCJ (resolution of 18/10/2018, no. 454/2018).     6. 40001/21 Nałęcz v. Poland 05/08/2021 Danuta NAŁĘCZ 1952 Lidzbark Warmiński Polish   On 13 January 2020 the Olsztyn Regional Court dismissed the applicant’s claim to declare a writ of execution unenforceable. The applicant appealed. On 29 April 2021 the Białystok Court of Appeal dismissed her appeal. It sat in a formation of three judges including judge G.W. appointed to that court by the President of Poland on 13/03/2019 on recommendation of the NCJ (resolution of 9/01/2019, no. 75/2019).     7. 42443/21 Wojtkielewicz v. Poland 12/08/2021 Andrzej WOJTKIELEWICZ 1987 Warszawa Polish   On an unspecified date the applicant was indicted on charges of murder. At the hearing of 7/02/2020 the president of the panel of the Suwałki Regional Court (judge P.S.) informed the parties that he had been appointed to that court by the President of Poland on 16/10/2016 on recommendation of the NCJ (resolution of 25/06/2019, no. 588/2019). No requests for his recusal were lodged. On 7/04/2020 the applicant was convicted by the Suwałki Regional Court (in the formation including judge P.S.). The applicant lodged an appeal. On 21/09/2020 the Białystok Court of Appeal upheld that judgment. On 17/03/2021 the Supreme Court dismissed the applicant’s cassation appeal.     8. 51529/21 Nawrot v. Poland 06/10/2021 Krzysztof NAWROT 1981 Siewierz Polish   On 25/07/2015 the applicant instituted civil proceedings for payment against a TV company for infringement of his personal rights. On 28/08/2020 the Warsaw-Praga Regional Court dismissed the applicant’s claim. The court sat in a single judge formation composed of judge M.M. appointed to that court by the President of Poland on 26/05/2020, on the recommendation of the NCJ (resolution of 26 July 2019, no.782/2019). On 4/02/2021 the Warsaw Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s appeal (it included allegation about the composition of the court). On 18/05/2021 a legal-aid lawyer issued an opinion stating that a cassation appeal would have no prospect of success. The applicant lodged a complaint under the   Act of 17   June   2004 on complaint about breach of the right to have a case examined in an investigation conducted or supervised by a prosecutor and in judicial proceedings without undue delay   (“the   2004 Act”). It was dismissed by the Warsaw Court of Appeal on 26/11/2020 (case no. VS 234/20). 9. 53725/21 Antoszewski v. Poland 19/10/2021 Arkadiusz ANTOSZEWSKI 1970 Wroclaw Polish Marcin ANDREASIK On 5/01/2018 the Legnica Regional Court convicted the applicant of dealing in drugs and sentenced him to 3 years’ imprisonment. On 8/04/2019 the Wrocław Court of Appeal increased the sentence to 4 years and 6 months. It sat in a formation of three judges, including judge R.Z. who was appointed to that court by the President of Poland on 20/02/2019 on recommendation of the NCJ (resolution of 10/10/2018, no. 447/2018). The applicant’s cassation appeal was dismissed as manifestly ill-founded by the Supreme Court on 21/04/2021. On 21/09/2021 the applicant requested the Supreme Court to reopen the proceedings on the ground of composition of the appellate court. The proceedings are pending.     10. 54815/21 Bętkowski v. Poland 27/10/2021 Krzysztof BĘTKOWSKI 1966 Sosnowiec Polish   On 11/05/2018 the Katowice Regional Court dismissed the applicant’s claim for payment and granted the defendant’s counter claim against the applicant. The applicant’s appeal was dismissed by the Katowice Court of Appeal on 29/04/2021 . It sat in a formation of three judges, including judges K.Z. and D.Ch appointed to that court by the President of Poland on 04/10/2019, on the recommendation of the NCJ (resolution of 11/12/2018 no. 625/2018).   11. 1181/22 Kamieński v. Poland 22/12/2021 Grzegorz KAMIEŃSKI 1980 Chorzów Polish   The applicant instituted civil proceedings in which he sought lower the child support benefit in respect of his daughter. On 5/07/2021 the Katowice District Court partly granted his claim. The defendants appealed. On 17/12/2021 the Katowice Court of Appeal granted the appeal and dismissed the applicant’s claim. It sat in a single judge formation composed of judge I.S. appointed to that court by the President of Poland on 14/10/2020, on recommendation of the NCJ (resolution of 7/05/2019, no. 440/2019).     12. 5685/22 Śliwa v. Poland 03/01/2022 Aleksandra ŚLIWA 1983 Warszawa Polish Monika Małgorzata GĄSIOROWSKA The Social Security Board recalculated the applicant’s social security benefits after it had established that there had been an error in her declarations. On 24/08/2019 the Kielce Regional Court dismissed her appeal against the Board’s decision. The applicant appealed further. On 20/10/2021 the Krakow Court of Appeal dismissed her appeal. it sat in a single judge formation, composed of a judge E.K. appointed to that court by the President of Poland on 26/04/2021, on recommendation of the NCJ (resolution of 19/08/2020, no. 672/2020).