CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 1 juin 1999

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s65B66A85 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .s97EB40D9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law 7 June 1999 Skórkiewicz v. Poland (dec.) - 39860/98 Decision 1.6.1999 [Section III] Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 Peaceful enjoyment of possessions Applicant deprived of pension for veterans because of previous membership of communist security services: inadmissible Under the Veterans and Persecuted Persons Act 1991, proceedings were instituted in order to verify whether the applicant, who had acquired the status of veteran under the previous Act, was entitled to retain it. Following these proceedings, he was divested of this status by reason of his participation in the communist Civil Militia in 1945 and was no longer considered entitled to a veteran’s pension. The decision was quashed by the Supreme Administrative Court upon the applicant’s appeal, but was reaffirmed by the Veterans Office. The Supreme Administrative Court dismissed the applicant’s further appeal, considering that, in the light of an enquiry made into the nature of his activities during his service in the Militia, it had not been established that he had participated in the consolidation of “the people’s power”. Therefore, the decision, which had granted him the status of veteran on that assumption, had lacked factual basis. He was thereby rightly divested of the status of veteran under the new Act. Inadmissibl e under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1: Although this provision guarantees benefits to a person who has contributed to a social insurance system, it cannot be interpreted as entitling that person to a pension of a certain amount. In the instant case, the applicant lost his right to the social insurance benefits for veterans, but was still entitled to the ordinary retirement benefits according to the 1991 Act. This Act was partly intended to condemn the political role the communist militia and security services in the establishment of the communist regime in repressing all political opposition. This legislation was based on the idea that the members of these bodies, whose functions were to combat the political or armed organisations having fought for the independence of Poland and the restitution of a democratic political system, did not deserve special privileges as accorded by the Special Status of Veteran Act 1982. Such considerations did not affect the property rights of the social insurance system in a disproportionate or arbitrary manner:   manifestly ill-founded.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes