Communicated on 11 March 2019
FIRST SECTION
Application no. 48498/17
Jerzy DARMOCHWAŁ
against Poland
lodged on 29 June 2017
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The applicant, Mr Jerzy Darmochwał, is a Polish national who was born in 1976 and is detained in Racibórz Prison. He is represented before the Court by Mr D. Letkiewicz, a lawyer practising in Tarnowskie Góry.
A. The circumstances of the case
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
The applicant has been serving a prison sentence in Racibórz Prison since 19 September 2012. He has been detained for the largest part of that time in cell no. 306.
On 24 June 2013 he lodged a civil claim against that prison, claiming 150,000 Polish zlotys (approximately 37,500 euros (EUR)) in compensation for overcrowding and inadequate sanitary conditions, including a lack of proper separation of the toilet annex in the cell, the low quality of the food and inadequate medical care.
On 30 June 2015 the Katowice Regional Court (Sąd Okręgowy) dismissed his claim. The court established that the toilet annex was separated from the rest of the cell by a partition of 120 cm in height and that entrance to it was covered by an oilcloth. The court found that such separation was enough to guarantee privacy.
The applicant appealed. On 22 December 2015 the Katowice Court of Appeal (Sąd Apelacyjny) dismissed his appeal.
On 23 November 2016 the Supreme Court (Sąd Najwyższy) refused to entertain the applicant’s cassation appeal.
B. Relevant domestic law and practice
A detailed description of the relevant domestic law and practice governing conditions of detention in Poland and domestic remedies available to detainees alleging inadequate conditions are set out in the Court’s pilot judgments in the cases of Orchowski v. Poland (no. 17885/04, §§ 75‑85, 22 October 2009) and Norbert Sikorski v. Poland (no. 17599/05, §§ 45‑88, 22 October 2009). More recent developments are described in the Court’s decision in the case of Łatak v. Poland (no. 52070/08, §§ 25-54, 12 October 2010).
The issue of the separation of toilet annexes is described in the case of Szafrański v. Poland (no. 17249/12, §§ 37-41, 15 December 2015).
COMPLAINT
The applicant complains under Article 8 of the Convention of the lack of adequate separation to protect his privacy in the toilet annex in his cell.
QUESTION TO THE PARTIES
Has there been a lack of respect for the applicant’s private life, within the meaning of Article 8 § 1 of the Convention?
Reference is made to the manner in which cell no. 306 of Racibórz Prison, where the applicant has been detained since 19 September 2012, is fitted with a toilet annex and to the alleged resulting lack of privacy.
The parties are asked to refer to the Court’s judgment in the case of Szafrański v. Poland (no. 17249/12, §§ 37-41, 15 December 2015).
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy