CEDH · PRESS;HEARINGS;ENG — 11 janvier 2006

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s40F41F73 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s69BE285C { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:85.05pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-85.05pt } .s9A223E1B { width:11.03pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s595A57E4 { width:85.05pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s3CED24E9 { width:27.05pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s9F8EB0C0 { width:18.63pt; display:inline-block } .s9E97F54A { width:85.05pt; display:inline-block } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS   8 11.1.2006   Press release issued by the Registrar   GRAND CHAMBER HEARING HUTTEN-CZAPSKA v. POLAND   The European Court of Human Rights is holding a Grand Chamber hearing today Wednesday 11 January 2006 at 9 a.m., in the case of Hutten-Czapska v. Poland (application no.   35014/97).   The applicant   Maria Hutten-Czapska is a French national of Polish origin, born in 1931 and living in Andresy, France. She owns a house and a plot of land in Gdynia, Poland.   She is one of around 100,000 landlords in Poland affected by a restrictive system of rent control [1] (from which some 600,000 to 900,000 tenants benefit), which originated in laws adopted under the former communist regime. The system imposes a number of restrictions on landlords’ rights, in particular, setting a ceiling on rent levels which is so low that landlords cannot even recoup their maintenance costs, let alone make a profit.   Summary of the facts   During the Second World War the applicant’s property was used by the German Army and then, in May 1945, by the Red Army. On 19 May 1945 part of the house was assigned to A.Z. In June 1945 Gdynia Town Court ( Sąd Grodzki ) ordered that the house be returned to the applicant’s parents. They started renovating the house but, shortly afterwards, were ordered to leave. In October   1945 A.Z. moved into the house. The house was taken under state management after the entering into force, on 13 February 1946, of a decree giving the Polish authorities power to assign flats in privately-owned buildings to particular tenants. The applicant’s parents tried unsuccessfully to regain possession of their property.   On 1 August 1974 a new regime on the state management of housing entered into force, the so-called “special lease scheme” ( szczególny tryb najmu ). On 8 July 1975 a decision was issued allowing W.P. to exchange the flat he leased under the scheme for the ground-floor flat in the applicant’s house. The decision was signed by a civil servant who was subordinate to W.P.   In the 1990s the applicant tried to have that decision declared null and void but only succeeded in obtaining a decision declaring that it had been issued contrary to the law.   On 18 September 1990 the applicant inherited her parents’ property and, in July 1991, she took over the management of the house. She subsequently brought several unsuccessful sets of proceedings to regain possession of her property and to relocate the tenants.   In 1994 a rent control scheme was applied to private property in Poland, under which landlords were both obliged to carry out costly maintenance work and prevented from charging rents which covered those costs. According to one calculation [2] , rents covered only about 60% of the maintenance costs. Severe restrictions on the termination of leases were also in place.   The 1994 Act was replaced by a new act in 2001, designed to improve the situation, which maintained all restrictions on the termination of leases and obligations in respect of maintenance of property and also introduced a new procedure for controlling rent increases. For instance, it was not possible to charge rent at a level exceeding 3% of the reconstruction value of the property in question. In the applicant’s case that amounted to 1,285 Polish zlotys (PLN) in 2004 (equivalent to 316 euros).   The Polish Constitutional Court found that the rent-control scheme under both the   1994   Act and the 2001 Act was unconstitutional and that it had placed a disproportionate and excessive burden on landlords. The provisions in question were repealed.   From 10 October 2000 until 31 December 2004 the applicant was able to increase the rent she charged by about 10% to PLN 5.15 a square metre (approximately 1.27 euros).   On 1 January 2005, new provisions entered into force which allowed, for the first time, rents exceeding 3% of the reconstruction value of the property being rented to increase by not more than 10% a year.   Complaint   The applicant complains that she has neither been able to regain possession of or use her property or charge adequate rent for its lease. She relies on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) to the European Convention on Human Rights.   Procedure   The application was lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on 6 December 1994 and declared admissible on 16 September 2003. A hearing on the merits took place on 27   January 2004.   On 22 February 2005 a Chamber of the Court held that there had been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 and considered that the violation originated in a systemic problem linked to the malfunctioning of Polish legislation (see press release no. 81 from 2005).   On 19 May 2005 the applicant requested that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber under Article 43 (referral to the Grand Chamber) and on 6 July 2005 the panel of the Grand Chamber accepted that request.   Composition of the Court   The case will be heard by the Grand Chamber composed as follows:   Luzius Wildhaber (Swiss), President , Christos Rozakis (Greek), Jean-Paul Costa (French), Boštjan M. Zupančič (Slovenian), Giovanni Bonello (Maltese), Françoise Tulkens (Belgian), Peer Lorenzen (Danish) Kristaq Traja (Albanian), Snejana Botoucharova (Bulgarian), Mindia Ugrekhelidze (Georgian), Vladimiro Zagrebelsky (Italian), Khanlar Hajiyev (Azerbaijani), Egbert Myjer (Netherlands), Sverre Erik Jebens (Norwegian), David Thór Björgvinsson (Icelandic), Ineta Ziemele (Latvian), judges , Anna Wyrozumska (Polish) , ad hoc judge , András Baka (Hungarian), Renate Jaeger (German), Anatoli Kovler (Russian), substitute judges , and also Lawrence Early , Deputy Grand Chamber Registrar .   Representatives of the parties   Government :   Jakub Wołąsiewicz , Agent ,   Piotr Styczeń , Counsel ,   Zdzisław Żydak , Józef Bajor , Szymon Jackowski ,   Aleksandra Mężykowska , Advisers ;   Applicant :   Bartłomiej Sochański , Counsel ,   Piotr Paszowski, Adviser.   After the hearing the Court will begin its deliberations, which are held in private.   ***   Registry of the European Court of Human Rights F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex Press contacts:   Roderick Liddell (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 24 92)   Emma Hellyer (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 15)   Stéphanie Klein (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 21 54)   Beverley Jacobs (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 90 21 54 21) Fax: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 27 91   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. Since 1 November 1998 it has sat as a full-time Court composed of an equal number of judges to that of the States party to the Convention. The Court examines the admissibility and merits of applications submitted to it. It sits in Chambers of 7 judges or, in exceptional cases, as a Grand Chamber of 17 judges. The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe supervises the execution of the Court’s judgments. More detailed information about the Court and its activities can be found on its Internet site. [1] According to information supplied by the Polish Government. [2] Prepared by the Office for Housing and Town Development.