FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 7508/09
by Marcin CZUBA
against Poland
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 15 December 2009 as a Chamber composed of:
Nicolas Bratza, President,
Lech Garlicki,
Giovanni Bonello,
Ljiljana Mijović,
Ján Šikuta,
Mihai Poalelungi,
Nebojša Vučinić, judges,
and Lawrence Early, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 2 February 2009,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Marcin Czuba, is a Polish national who was born in 1978. He is currently serving a prison sentence in Łódź prison.
The Polish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Jakub Wołąsiewicz of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
On 25 April 2008 the Zgierz District Court convicted the applicant of several counts of robbery and sentenced him to two years and six months’ imprisonment. On 26 September 2008 the Łódź Regional Court upheld the first-instance judgment.
On a later unknown date the applicant requested the court that a legal‑aid lawyer be assigned to the case to file a cassation appeal with the Supreme Court. The court allowed his request on a later unknown date.
In a letter to the court dated 1 December 2008 the lawyer informed the court about his refusal to draw up a cassation appeal. On 5 December 2008 the Łódź Regional Court informed the applicant about the lawyer’s refusal and prolonged the time-limit for lodging a cassation appeal by seven days. The court failed to inform the applicant of his further procedural rights.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complained about the outcome and unfairness of the proceedings, in particular that the courts dealing with his case had wrongly established the facts and assessed evidence.
The applicant further complained that the proceedings in his case had been unfair in that he had been denied an effective access to the Supreme Court, because his legal‑aid lawyer had refused to file a cassation appeal with the Supreme Court.
THE LAW
On 11 August 2009 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant:
“I, Marcin CZUBA, note that the Government of Poland are prepared to pay me the sum of PLN 4,500 (four 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. 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.”
On 12 November 2009 the Court received the following declaration from the Government:
“I, Jakub Wołąsiewicz, Agent of the Government, declare that the Government of Poland offer to pay PLN 4,500 (four thousand five hundred Polish zlotys) to Mr Marcin CZUBA 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. 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.”
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