FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
PILOT-JUDGMENT PROCEDURE
Application no. 8019/02
by Albina SŁODOWNIK and Małgorzata MADZIAR
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 6 June 2001,
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, Ms Albina Słodownik (“the first applicant”) and Ms Małgorzata Madziar (“the second applicant”), are Polish nationals. The first applicant was born in 1939 and lived in Dębe Wielkie. The applicant died on an unspecified date. The second applicant was born in 1960 and lives in Mińsk Mazowiecki. She stated that she wished to continue the proceedings before the Court in her late mother's stead.
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. 8019/02
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows.
On 22 January 1993 the Siedlce Regional Court (Sąd Wojewódzki) gave a declaratory judgment stating that the applicants' family had owned real property in the territories beyond the Bug River.
On an unspecified date in 1990 the applicants asked the Mińsk Mazowiecki District Office (Urząd Rejonowy) to enable them to acquire State property in compensation for the property abandoned in the territories beyond the Bug River.
On 31 December 1990 the authorities informed them that their claim had been entered in the relevant register as claim no. 25 but its realisation depended on the adoption of future measures by Parliament in respect of Bug River claims.
On an unspecified date in 2001 the applicants lodged a claim for compensation for the Bug River property against the State Treasury. The action was unsuccessful. On 1 March 2001 the claim was rejected for lack of substantiation.
The applicants' 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).
The applicants did not produce any certificate or decision stating the current value of their claim.
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