FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
PILOT-JUDGMENT PROCEDURE
Application no. 299/03
by Jan FLOREK and Leonarda OLĘDZKA
against Poland
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 23 September 2008 as a Chamber composed of:
Nicolas Bratza, President,
Lech Garlicki,
Giovanni Bonello,
Ljiljana Mijović,
David Thór Björgvinsson,
Ján Šikuta,
Päivi Hirvelä, judges,
and Lawrence Early, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 20 August 2002,
Having regard to the decision to apply the pilot-judgment procedure and to adjourn its consideration of applications deriving from the same systemic problem identified in the case of Broniowski v. Poland (no. 31443/96),
Having regard to the decisions to strike the applications Wolkenberg and Others v. Poland (no. 50003/99) and Witkowska-Toboła v. Poland (no. 11208/02) out of the Court's list of cases,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicants, Mr Jan Florek (“the first applicant”) and Ms Leonarda Olędzka (“the second applicant”), are Polish nationals who were born in 1951 and 1930 respectively and live in Jelenia Góra.
A. Historical background to Bug River cases before the Court
(See E.G. v. Poland, no. 50425/99, §§ 2-5).
B. Particular circumstances of case no. 299/03
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
1. The first applicant's attempts to recover compensation
On 12 February 1991 the Jelenia Góra Regional Court (Sąd Wojewódzki) gave a declaratory judgment stating that the first applicant's family had owned real property in the territories beyond the Bug River.
On an unspecified date the first applicant asked the Jelenia Góra District Office (Urząd Rejonowy) to enable him to acquire State property in compensation for the property abandoned in the territories beyond the Bug River.
On 29 May 1991 the authorities informed him that his claim had been entered in the relevant register as claim no. 531 but its realisation depended on the adoption of future measures by Parliament in respect of Bug River claims.
Later, in 1991-2001, the first applicant made several attempts to enforce his claim for compensation at auctions for the sale of State property. According to the applicant's estimations, the value of the acquired property amounted 21.9 % of the value of the abandoned property.
On 8 May 2001 the first applicant obtained a certificate issued by the Mayor of Jelenia Góra (Prezydent Miasta) confirming that he had the right to compensation for the property abandoned by his family, valued at 464,316 Polish zlotys (PLN) as of October 2000. The decision stated that the claim had already been partly realised. The remainder of the claim amounted to PLN 334,910.
The first applicant's subsequent attempts to acquire State property were unsuccessful. The only possibility of enforcing the claim was to participate in competitive bids for the sale of State property. However, the State authorities throughout Poland officially acknowledged the acute shortage of State-owned land designated for the realisation of the Bug River claims.
This fact and the fact that at the material time it was the authorities' common practice to desist from organising auctions for Bug River claimants or to openly deny them the opportunity to enforce their entitlement through the statutory bidding procedure was established by the Court in the Broniowski judgment (see Broniowski, cited above, §§ 48-61, 69-87 and 168-176).
2. The second applicant's attempts to recover compensation
On 24 March 1993 the Jelenia Góra Regional Court gave a declaratory judgment stating that the second applicant's parents had owned real property in the territories beyond the Bug River.
On 3 April 2000 the Jelenia Góra District Court (Sąd Rejonowy) gave a decision declaring that the second applicant had acquired the entire estate left by her mother.
On 26 July 2001 the second applicant obtained a certificate issued by the Mayor of Jelenia Góra confirming that she had the right to compensation for the property abandoned by her family. It emerges from this decision that the applicant was entitled to compensation corresponding to the full value of the property abandoned by her mother (PLN 93,952) and to one half of the value of the property abandoned by her father (PLN 1,005,208).
The second applicant's subsequent attempts to acquire State property were unsuccessful. The only possibility of enforcing the claim was to participate in competitive bids for the sale of State property. However, the State authorities throughout Poland officially acknowledged the acute shortage of State-owned land designated for the realisation of the Bug River claims.
This fact and the fact that at the material time it was the authorities' common practice to desist from organising auctions for Bug River claimants or to openly deny them the opportunity to enforce their entitlement through the statutory bidding procedure was established by the Court in the Broniowski judgment (see Broniowski, cited above, §§ 48-61, 69-87 and 168-176).
3. The applicants' claims for compensation
Between 2000 and 2002 the applicants initiated several sets of proceedings for compensation against the State Treasury. The actions were dismissed as unsubstantiated.
C. Relevant domestic law and practice in respect of Bug River claims
(See E.G. v. Poland, no. 50425/99, §§ 16-17).
COMPLAINT
(See E.G. v. Poland, no. 50425/99, § 18).
THE LAW
(See E.G. v. Poland, no. 50425/99, §§ 19-29).
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
1. Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases;
2. Decides to close the pilot-judgment procedure applied in respect of the Bug River applications in the case of Broniowski v. Poland (no. 31443/96).
Lawrence EarlyNicolas Bratza
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy