Communicated on 7 September 2020
Published on 28 September 2020
FIRST SECTION
Application no. 3990/16
Arkadiusz JADACKI
against Poland
lodged on 9 January 2016
STATEMENT OF FACTS
1. The applicant, Mr Arkadiusz Jadacki, is a Polish national, who was born in 1975 and lives in Warszawa. He is represented before the Court by Mr P. Biernacki, a lawyer practising in Warsaw.
The circumstances of the case
2. The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
3. At the material time, the applicant was a tax prosecutor (oskarżyciel skarbowy). In reply to a vacancy notice made by the National Council of Prosecution (Krajowa Rada Prokuratury), he applied to be granted a post of a district prosecutor.
4. His application was not entertained. On 28 April 2014 the Płock Regional Prosecutor informed the applicant that he had not met formal requirements for the post, namely, at the time when he filed his application for the vacancy, he had not been occupying any of the enumerated posts (assistant prosecutor, prosecutor, judge, advocate, notary public, etc.)
5. The applicant was instructed in writing that he was entitled to lodge, within seven days, an appeal (zastrzeżenie) against having his job application left without examination. The jurisdiction to examine such an appeal lay with the National Council of Prosecution.
6. On 23 June 2014 the National Council of Prosecution did not grant the applicant’s appeal (nie uwzglednia).
7. On 24 September 2014 the Warsaw Regional Administrative Court rejected the applicant’s appeal, finding that pursuant to Section 14 (b) of the Act of 20 June 1985 on Prosecuting Authorities (Ustawa o Prokuraturze), there had been no possibility to lodge an appeal against the decision of the National Council of Prosecution.
8. On 9 July 2015 the Supreme Administrative Court dismissed the applicant’s cassation appeal.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complains under Article 6 of the Convention that he was derived of access to a court in order to pursue his case concerning his application for public employment.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Was Article 6 § 1 of the Convention under its civil head applicable to the proceedings in the present case?
2. If so, did the applicant have access to a court for the determination of his civil rights and obligations, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention?
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy