FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 36031/06
by Janusz CYROCKI
against Poland
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 17 November 2009 as a Chamber composed of:
Nicolas Bratza, President,
Lech Garlicki,
Giovanni Bonello,
Ljiljana Mijović,
Päivi Hirvelä,
Ledi Bianku,
Nebojša Vučinić, judges,
and Lawrence Early, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 22 August 2006,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Janusz Cyrocki, is a Polish national who was born in 1982 and lives in Gdańsk. The Polish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, by their Agent, Mr J. Wołąsiewicz of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
On 6 November 2007 the President of the Fourth Section of the Court decided to communicate the applicant’s complaint under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention about the length of his pre-trial detention, which lasted one year, eleven months and thirteen days.
The applicant’s detention started on 22 October 2004, when he was arrested. On 28 December 2007 the Gdańsk Regional Court convicted the applicant and sentenced him to five and a half years’ imprisonment. It appears that the proceedings are currently pending an appeal.
In parallel to the applicant’s pre-trial detention, namely from 19 November 2004 to 27 February 2005, from 27 February to 13 May 2005 and from 20 July 2005 to 20 April 2006 the applicant served three separate prison sentences which had been imposed on him in other criminal proceedings.
THE LAW
On 4 August 2009 the Court received the following declaration from the Government:
“I, Jakub Wołąsiewicz, Agent of the Polish Government, declare that the Government of Poland offer to pay PLN 7,500 (seven thousand five hundred Polish zlotys) to Mr Janusz Cyrocki with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
This sum, which is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, will be free of any taxes that may be applicable and it will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three-month period, the Government undertake to pay simple interest on it, from expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The payment will constitute the final resolution of the case.”
On 25 September 2009 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant:
“I, Janusz Cyrocki, note that the Government of Poland are prepared to pay me the sum of PLN 7,500 (seven thousand five hundred Polish zlotys) with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
This sum, which is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, will be free of any taxes that may be applicable and it will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. From the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
I accept the proposal and waive any further claims against Poland in respect of the facts giving rise to this application. I declare that this constitutes a final resolution of the case.”
The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention). In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Lawrence EarlyNicolas Bratza
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy