CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 10 juillet 2023

.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 } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s3B53EBCA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; font-size:7pt } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s23860FF7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s5FFF0A7F { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:9pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB217F55E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:9pt } .s5FFF0A74 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:6pt } Published on 28 August 2023   FIRST SECTION Application no. 29320/22 OWOCE I WARZYWA PODLASIA sp. z o.o. against Poland and 2 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 10 July 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicants were parties to proceedings before the Supreme Administrative Court. All applicants had their cases examined by the Supreme Administrative Court sitting in a formation including judges appointed 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 Supreme Administrative Court 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.     QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Was the formation of the Supreme Administrative 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 the Supreme Administrative Court 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 Ad vance 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.     APPENDIX   No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth / Registration Place of Residence Nationality Represented by Notes 1. 29320/22 Owoce i Warzywa Podlasia sp. z o.o. v.   Poland 03/06/2022 OWOCE I WARZYWA PODLASIA SP. Z O.O. 2003 Sokółka Polish Bogdana SŁUPSKA-UCZKIEWICZ On 28/11/2017 the Warsaw Regional Administrative Court dismissed the applicant company’s complaint against an administrative decision related to its operation on the market of fruits and vegetables.   On 18/06/2021 the Supreme Administrative Court dismissed the applicant company’s cassation appeal against that judgment (case no. I GSK 1927/18, served on 06/12/2021). It sat in camera in a panel of three judges, including Ms Małgorzata Grzelak, appointed to that court by the President of Poland on 03/06/2019, on recommendation of the NCJ (resolution no. 528/2018 of 08/11/2018).   2. 33281/22 Kucharski v.   Poland 21/06/2022 Ryszard KUCHARSKI 1965 Warszawa Polish   On 28/04/2020 the Warsaw Regional Administrative Court dismissed the applicant’s complaint against an administrative decision refusing to grant him a security clearance necessary for the continuation of his work.   On 16/12/2021 the Supreme Administrative Court dismissed the applicant’s cassation appeal (case no. III OSK 3213/21, served on 25/02/2022). It sat in camera in a panel of three judges, including Mr Przemysław Szustakiewicz, appointed to that court by the President of Poland on 04/02/2019, on recommendation of the NCJ (resolution no. 529/2018 of 08/11/2018).   3. 36205/22 Krajowe Centrum Turystyki i Hotelarstwa   sp. z o.o. v.   Poland 11/07/2022 KRAJOWE CENTRUM TURYSTYKI I HOTELARSTWA SP. Z O.O. 2012 Katowice Polish Wojciech CISZEWSKI On 19/09/2018 the Warsaw Regional Administrative Court dismissed the applicant company’s complaint against an administrative decision dismissing its claim for compensation for a delayed flight.   On 11/01/2022 the Supreme Administrative Court dismissed the applicant company’s cassation appeal against that judgment (case no. I OSK 646/19). It sat in camera in a panel of three judges, including Mr Mirosław Wincenciak, appointed to that court by the President of Poland on 13/03/2019, on recommendation of the NCJ (resolution no. 531/2018 of 08/11/2018).