FOURTH SECTION
FINAL DECISION
AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF
Application no. 52595/99
by Mirosław SKOWROŃSKI
against Poland
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 26 August 2003 as a Chamber composed of
SirNicolas Bratza, President,
MrM. Pellonpää,
MrM. Fischbach,
MrR. Maruste,
MrS. Pavlovschi,
MrL. Garlicki,
MrJ. Borrego Borrego, judges,
and Mr M. O’BOYLE, Section Registrar,[Note1]
Having regard to the above application lodged on 23 February 1999,
Having regard to the partial decision of 28 June 2001,
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mirosław Skowroński, is a Polish[Note2] national, who was born in 1955 and lives in Śniechy, Poland.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
In 1987 the applicant filed with the Lipno District Court (Sąd Rejonowy) an action in which he requested that the co-ownership of an estate be dissolved.
The court held hearings on 7 October 1987, 3 January 1988 and 2 March 1990.
At the hearing held on 11 May 1990 the court ordered an expert opinion.
It held a hearing on 24 May 1991.
On 19 March 1992 the applicant submitted to the court a letter in which he stated that he did not wish to pursue the case.
The court held a hearing on 3 April 1992. The opposing party’s lawyer did not agree to the applicant’s proposal to discontinue the proceedings.
On 5 June 1992 the court ordered an expert opinion. It was submitted on 4 June 1996.
At the hearing held on 10 July 1996 the parties requested that the proceedings be stayed, as they considered reaching an out-of-court settlement. Their request was granted.
At the request of the opposing party the court resumed the proceedings on 6 January 1997.
It held a hearing on 14 February 1997, at which it ordered another expert opinion.
The court held hearings on 10 October 1997 and 21 November 1997, as well as 8 April, 11 September and 16 October 1998. It ordered another expert opinion.
On 9 December 1998 the court gave judgment. It granted the sole ownership of the estate to the opposing party.
THE LAW
The applicant’s complaint relates to the length of the proceedings, which began in 1987 and ended on 9 December 1998. They therefore lasted over 11 years, out of which a period of 5 years, 7 months and 9 days falls within the Court’s competence ratione temporis, Poland having recognised the right of individual petition as from 1 May 1993.
According to the applicant, the length of the proceedings is in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement laid down in Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. The Government reject the allegation.
The Court considers, in the light of the criteria established in its case-law on the question of “reasonable time” (the complexity of the case, the applicant’s conduct and that of the competent authorities), and having regard to all the information in its possession, that an examination of the merits of this complaint is required.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Declares the remainder of the application admissible, without prejudging the merits of the case.
Michael O’BoyleNicolas Bratza
RegistrarPresident
[Note1]To be checked. If changes take place, either type in or remove names as necessary or launch template DE0.9 and insert the correct list.
[Note2]To be checked.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy