Resolution ResDH(2005)37
concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
of 6 May 2003 (Friendly settlement)
in the case of Szymikowska and Szymikowski against Poland
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 25 April 2005
at the 922nd meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)
The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms as amended by Protocol No. 11 (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”),
Having regard to the final judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Szymikowska and Szymikowski delivered on 6 May 2003 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers under Article 46 of the Convention;
Recalling that the case originated in an application (No. 43786/98) against Poland, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 9 June 1998 under former Article 25 of the Convention by Mrs Jadwiga Szymikowska and Mr Zygmunt Szymikowski, Polish nationals, and that the Court, seised of the case under Article 5, paragraph 2, of Protocol No. 11, declared admissible the complaint relating to the length of certain civil proceedings;
Whereas in its judgment of 6 May 2003, the Court, after having taken formal note of a friendly settlement reached by the government of the respondent state and the applicants, and having been satisfied that the settlement was based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention or its Protocols, decided unanimously to strike the case out of its list and took note of the parties' undertaking not to request a re-hearing of the case before the Grand Chamber;
Whereas under the above-mentioned friendly settlement it was agreed that the Polish government would pay the applicants the sum of 15 000 Polish zlotys in respect of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage, as well as costs and expenses, within three months as from the delivery of the judgment;
Whereas, according to the friendly settlement, the Polish government had undertaken to supervise the progress of the domestic proceedings and the Minister of Justice had asked the President of the Gdańsk District Court to inform him at regular intervals about the progress of the proceedings;
Recalling that Rule 43, paragraph 3, of the Rules of the Court (former Article 44, paragraph 2) provides that the striking-out of a case which has been declared admissible shall be effected by means of a judgment which the President shall forward to the Committee of Ministers once it has become final in order to allow it to supervise, in accordance with Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention, the execution of any undertakings which may have been attached to the discontinuance, friendly settlement or solution of the matter;
Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;
Having satisfied itself that on 26 June 2003, within the time-limit agreed to under the terms of the friendly settlement, the Government of the respondent state had paid the applicants the sum provided for in the friendly settlement;
Noting that the Polish authorities, in accordance with their undertaking under the friendly settlement, had placed the domestic proceedings under supervision and had regularly informed the Committee of Ministers about their progress, until their final conclusion on 11 March 2004;
Recalling that, as regards the applicants' complaint declared admissible in this case, the Committee of Ministers is at present supervising the adoption by the respondent state of general measures in the context of the execution of several judgments of the Court (in particular the Podbielski judgment of 30 October 1998) finding violations of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention on account of the excessive length of civil proceedings,
Declares, after having examined the information supplied by the government of Poland, that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention with respect to the undertakings subscribed to in this case.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy