FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 16172/07
by Tomasz MAGNUSZEWSKI
against Poland
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 24 November 2009 as a Chamber composed of:
Nicolas Bratza, President,
Lech Garlicki,
Giovanni Bonello,
Ljiljana Mijović,
David Thór Björgvinsson,
Ledi Bianku,
Mihai Poalelungi, judges,
and Lawrence Early, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 29 March 2007,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Tomasz Magnuszewski, is a Polish national who was born in 1978. He is currently serving a prison sentence in Lublin prison. The Polish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr J. Wołąsiewicz of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
On 10 August 2006 the applicant was sentenced by the Lublin District Court to 8 years’ imprisonment for robbery. On 30 January 2007 the Lublin Regional Court amended the judgment and sentenced the applicant to 3 years’ imprisonment.
By a letter dated 22 March 2007 the Lublin Regional Court informed the applicant that his legal‑aid lawyer had found no legal grounds on which he could draft a cassation appeal and that the time-limit for lodging a cassation appeal was to expire on 30 March 2007.
The applicant was served with this letter on 28 March 2007.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that he had been denied an effective access to the cassation court because his legal‑aid lawyer had refused to prepare and lodge a cassation appeal.
THE LAW
On 25 August 2009 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant:
“I, Tomasz MAGNUSZEWSKI, note that the Government of Poland are prepared to pay me the sum of PLN 4,500 (four thousand five hundred 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. 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 giving rise to this application. I declare that this constitutes a final resolution of the case.”
On 21 October 2009 the Court received the following declaration from the Government:
“I, Jakub Wołąsiewicz, Agent of the Government, declare that the Government of Poland offer to pay PLN 4,500 (four thousand five hundred Polish zlotys) to Mr Tomasz MAGNUSZEWSKI 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. 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. 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.”
The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention). In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Lawrence EarlyNicolas Bratza
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy