FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 7453/02
by Julian CZYŻEWSKI
against Poland
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 13 November 2003 as a Chamber composed of:
MrM. Pellonpää, President,
MrsV. Strážnická,
MrM. Fischbach,
MrR. Maruste,
MrS. Pavlovschi,
MrL. Garlicki,
MrJ. Borrego Borrego, judges,
and Mr M. O’Boyle, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 31 January 2002,
Having regard to the parties’ declarations on concluding a friendly settlement,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Julian Czyżewski, is a Polish national who was born in 1923 and lives in Warsaw, Poland. The respondent Government were represented by their Agent, Mr K. Drzewicki, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
A. Facts prior to 1 May 1993
On 21 October 1992 the applicant initiated before the Labour Chamber of the Warsaw District Court (Sąd Rejonowy w Warszawie) proceedings against the association “E” which advertised itself as an employment agency for pensioners and the “C” company. The applicant claimed that for several months he had been working as a warden at the “C” company for which he had not received remuneration.
On 13 January 1993 the Warsaw District Court held a first hearing.
On 19 April 1993 the trial court, sitting in camera, decided to transfer the case to the civil court. The applicant appealed against this decision.
B. Facts after 30 April 1993
On 14 September 1993 the Labour Chamber of the Warsaw Regional Court (Sąd Wojewódzki w Warszawie) allowed the applicant’s appeal and quashed the Warsaw District Court’s decision of 19 April 1993.
In 1994 and 1995 the trial court held in total seven hearings. Some of them were adjourned due to the absence of the defendant.
On 19 April and 8 July 1996 hearings were held.
On 2 October 1996 the Labour Chamber of the trial court decided, sitting in camera, to transfer the case to the Civil Chamber of the Warsaw District Court. It considered that the contract between the parties was of civil law nature and therefore only a civil court was competent to examine it. The applicant appealed against this decision but on 4 March 1997 the Warsaw Regional Court dismissed his appeal.
In 1997 the trial court held in total four hearings.
On 12 December 1997 the applicant extended his claim.
The hearing which was held on 13 January 1998 was for the first time adjourned due the applicant’s absence. It was caused by an accident.
Subsequently, on 16 April 1998 the trial court held a hearing.
Between 17 April 1998 and 27 December 2000 no hearings were held.
On 28 December 2000 the trial court held a hearing. All defendants were absent. The court stayed the proceedings until 30 June 2001.
On 29 June 2001 the applicant lodged an application to resume the proceedings.
Subsequently, the applicant repeatedly inquired about his case and asked the trial court to resume the proceedings.
On 10 April 2003 the Warsaw District Court ordered the applicant to submit an original of his application of 29 June 2001. The proceedings remain stayed.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that the length of the proceedings had exceeded a reasonable time.
THE LAW
On 16 May 2003 the Court received from the Polish Government a declaration that read, in so far as relevant:
“I declare that, with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case, the Government of Poland offer to pay PLN 12,000 to Mr Julian Czyżewski. This sum is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs, and it will be payable within three months.... This payment will constitute the final resolution of the case. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three-month period, the Government undertake to pay, until settlement, simple interest on the amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points....”
On 13 October 2003 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant that read, in its relevant part:
“I note that the Government of Poland are prepared to pay me the sum of PLN 12,000 covering pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
I accept the proposal and waive any further claims against Poland in respect of the facts of this application. I declare that this constitutes a final settlement of the case.
This declaration is made in the context of a friendly settlement which the Government and I have reached....”
The Court takes note of the agreement reached between the parties and considers that the matter has been resolved (Article 37 § 1 (b) of the Convention). Furthermore, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 in fine, the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the examination of the application to be continued. Accordingly, the application to the case of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should be discontinued and the case struck out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Michael O’BoyleMatti Pellonpää
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy