CEDH · PRESS;GENERAL;ENG — 15 janvier 2002

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s94935B0F { width:389.85pt; display:inline-block } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sAFD6E6A9 { width:48.09pt; display:inline-block } .s423D90F6 { width:150.84pt; display:inline-block } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .s37CDBE05 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sCB27B9E { width:16.66pt; display:inline-block } .sC5412BEF { width:51.05pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s85226119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS     011   15.1.2002   Press release issued by the Registrar   CHAMBER JUDGMENTS CONCERNING Poland   The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing the following two Chamber judgments of which only Z.   R.   v. Poland is final [1] :   SECTION 2   (1)     Mączyński v. Poland (application no. 43779/98))   Violation Article 6 § 1   Zygmunt Mączyński, a Polish national born in 1921 and living in Michałowice, Poland, complained about the length of civil proceedings, which were started in 1976 and are still pending [2] , concerning the division of property jointly owned by him and his former wife. He relied on Article 6 § 1 (right to a determination of civil rights within a reasonable time) of the European Convention on Human Rights   The European Court of Human Rights held by six votes to one that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 and awarded the applicant 5,500 Euros for non-pecuniary damage. (The judgment is available only in English.)   SECTION 4   (2)     Z.   R.   v. Poland (no. 32499/96))   Friendly settlement   On 22 October 1994 Z.   R., a Polish national born in 1960 and living in Szczecin, Poland, was detained on remand on suspicion of forging vehicle registration certificates. His detention was repeatedly prolonged despite numerous appeals. He applied on several occasions for release from detention but was unsuccessful in both his applications and subsequent appeals. On 11 April 1997 he was convicted of aggravated theft, forgery of documents and use of forged documents, handling stolen goods and fraud and sentenced to six years in prison. He complained, relying on Article 5 § 3 (right to liberty and security) of the Convention, about the length of his detention on remand and, relying on Article 5 § 4, that he was never brought before a court in the proceedings concerning judicial review of his detention. The case has been struck out following a friendly settlement in which 12,000 Polish zlotys is to be paid for any non-pecuniary and pecuniary damage, costs and expenses.   (The judgment is available only in English.)   ***   The Court’s judgments are accessible on its Internet site ( http://www.echr.coe.int ).   Registry of the European Court of Human Rights F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex Contacts:   Roderick Liddell (telephone: (0)3 88 41 24 92)   Emma Hellyer (telephone: (0)3 90 21 42 15) Fax: (0)3 88 41 27 91   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. On 1 November 1998 a full-time Court was established, replacing the original two-tier system of a part-time Commission and Court. [1] Under Article 43 of the European Convention on Human Rights, within three months from the date of a Chamber judgment, any party to the case may, in exceptional cases, request that the case be referred to the 17-member Grand Chamber of the Court.   In that event, a panel of five judges considers whether the case raises a serious question affecting the interpretation or application of the Convention or its Protocols, or a serious issue of general importance, in which case the Grand Chamber will deliver a final judgment. If no such question or issue arises, the panel will reject the request, at which point the judgment becomes final. Otherwise Chamber judgments become final on the expiry of the three-month period or earlier if the parties declare that they do not intend to make a request to refer. [2] Of which the Court can only take into consideration around eight years and seven months, from 1 May 1993, when Poland recognised the right of individual petition.