FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 32743/06
by Piotr FALKOWSKI
against Poland
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 23 October 2007 as a Chamber composed of:
SirNicolas Bratza, President,
MrJ. Casadevall,
MrG. Bonello,
MrK. Traja,
MrS. Pavlovschi,
MrL. Garlicki,
MsL. Mijović, judges,
and Mr T.L. Early, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 2 August 2006,
Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Piotr Falkowski, was a Polish national who was born in 1942 and lived in Kraków. He died on 22 February 2007. On 5 March 2007 the applicant’s widow expressed the wish to pursue the application in her late husband’s stead. The Polish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr J.Wołąsiewicz of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
On 19 December 1979 the applicant’s former wife lodged a request for the division of matrimonial property with the Kraków District Court (Sąd Rejonowy).
By the Kraków District Court’s decision of 5 April 1982 K.S., the father of the applicant’s former wife, was granted the status of a party to the proceedings
On 15 October 1984 the Kraków District Court gave a decision on the division of the matrimonial property.
On 10 April 1985 the Kraków Regional Court (Sąd Okręgowy) quashed the first-instance decision.
On an unspecified date in 1996 K.S. died and the proceedings were stayed.
On 25 February 2001 the proceedings were resumed.
On an unspecified date the applicant’s daughter was granted the status of a party to the proceedings as she was the heir of K.S. She was heard by the Kraków District Court.
On 18 December 2001 the Kraków District Court gave a preliminary decision (postanowienie wstępne) and established the parties’ shares in the matrimonial property.
On 2 July 2004 the Kraków District Court gave a decision on the division of the matrimonial property.
On 5 October 2005 the Kraków Regional Court partly amended the first-instance decision of 2 July 2004 and partly dismissed the applicant’s appeal.
On 22 December 2005 the applicant’s lawyer lodged a cassation appeal.
On 22 February 2006 the Supreme Court (Sąd Najwyższy) refused to deal with the applicant’s cassation appeal. The decision was served on the applicant on 21 March 2006.
On 4 March 2005 the applicant filed with the Kraków Regional Court a complaint about a breach of the right to a trial within a reasonable time and asked for just satisfaction in the amount of 10 000 Polish zlotys (PLN).
On 7 April 2005 the Kraków Regional Court dismissed his complaint on the ground that on the date of entry into force of the 2004 Act no undue delays caused by the court’s conduct of the proceedings could be discerned.
COMPLAINTS
1. The applicant complained under Article 6 of the Convention about the excessive length of the proceedings in his case.
2. The applicant further complained about unfairness of the proceedings.
THE LAW
1. The standing of the applicant’s widow.
The Court must first address the issue of the entitlement of the applicant’s widow, Ms Barbara Falkowska, to pursue the application originally introduced by the applicant, who died on 22 February 2007.
The Court recalls that in various cases where an applicant died in the course of the proceedings it has taken into account the statements of the applicant’s heirs or of close members of his family who expressed the wish to pursue the proceedings before the Court (see, for example, Malhous v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 33071/96, Krempovskij v. Lithuania (dec.), no. 37193/97, 20 April 1999; M.B. v. Poland, (dec.) no. 34091/96, 8 March 2001; Sildedzis v. Poland, no. 45214/99, 24 May 2005).
The Court considers that the applicant’s widow can claim a legitimate interest in pursuing the proceedings before the Court in the applicant’s stead. It therefore accepts her request of 5 March 2007.
2. Friendly settlement
On 22 June 2007 the Court received the following declaration signed by the Agent of the Government:
“I declare that the Government of Poland offer to pay PLN 22,000 (twenty-two thousand Polish zlotys) to Ms Barbara Falkowska 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 the 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 19 June 2007 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant’ widow Ms Barbara Falkowska:
“I note that the Government of Poland are prepared to pay me the sum of PLN 22,000 (twenty-two thousand 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 of this application. I declare that this constitutes a final settlement of the case.”
The Court takes note of the friendly settlement 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, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
T.L. EarlyNicolas Bratza
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy