CEDH · PRESS;ADMISSIBILITYDECISIONS;ENG — 20 décembre 2002

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s5FFF0A77 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:1pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s94935B0F { width:389.85pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s3964C3A3 { width:1.36pt; display:inline-block } .s901C2590 { width:56.7pt; display:inline-block } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 }   EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS     651   20.12.2002   Press release issued by the Registrar   BRONIOWSKI v. POLAND (application no. 31443/96)   COURT DECLARES APPLICATION ADMISSIBLE     The European Court of Human Rights has declared admissible the application brought by Jerzy Broniowski, a Polish national, who was born in 1944 and lives in Wieliczka (Poland).   The Court rejected the Polish Government’s argument that the acts complained of predated Poland’s ratification of the European Convention on Human Rights and therefore fell outside the Court’s jurisdiction.   It also found that Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention (protection of property) was applicable in so far as the applicant had a proprietary interest recognised under Polish law.   Finally, the Court took the view that the Government’s arguments concerning the applicant’s alleged failure to exhaust domestic remedies should be considered in relation to the merits of the case.   The Court will now proceed to its examination of the merits, which the decision on admissibility in no way prejudges. It will deliver judgment at a later date.   Summary of the facts   The applicant’s grandmother along with many others who had been living in the Eastern provinces of pre-war Poland (which included large areas of present-day Belarus, Ukraine and territories around Vilnius in what is now Lithuania) was repatriated after Poland’s eastern border had been redrawn along the Bug River (whose central course formed part of the Curzon line), in the aftermath of the Second World War. The area was known as the “Borderlands” (“ Kresy” ) and also, “territories beyond the Bug River” ( “ziemie zabużańskie” ).   Following the so-called “republican agreements” between the Polish Committee of National Liberation and former Soviet Republics of Lithuania, Belarus and Ukraine, Poland undertook to compensate those who had been “repatriated” from the “territories beyond the Bug River” and had had to abandon their properties. From 1944 to 1953 around 1,240,000 people were “repatriated” under the provisions of the republican agreements. Since 1946 Polish law has entitled those repatriated in such circumstances to compensation in kind; they have been entitled to buy land from the State and have the value of the abandoned property deducted either from the fee for the so-called “perpetual use” of this land or from the price of the compensatory property or land.   However, since the entry into force of the Local Government Act of 10 May 1990, local administration, while still obliged to meet these compensation claims, has had insufficient land to meet the various demands.   The applicant, along with around 90,000 [1] others entitled to compensatory property, has not yet received compensation for the property abandoned by his grandmother - valued at 1,949,560 old Polish zlotys. According to the applicant, he has received only approximately 4% of its value (ie. of the compensation due to him) in the form of the right of perpetual use of a small building plot which his mother bought from the State in 1981.   Complaint   The applicant alleged a breach of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention in that his entitlement to compensation for property abandoned in the territories beyond the Bug River had not been satisfied.   Procedure   The application was lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 12 March 1996 and transmitted to the Court on 1 November 1998. On 26 March 2002 the Chamber decided unanimously to relinquish jurisdiction in favour of the Grand Chamber. Around 100 cases raising similar issues were adjourned pending the completion of the Grand Chamber proceedings.   A public hearing was held on 23 October 2002 (see press release no. 522).         Registry of the European Court of Human Rights F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex 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) Fax: +00 33 (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] As reported in “Rzeczpospolita” on 13 December 2001.