FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
PILOT-JUDGMENT PROCEDURE
Application no. 3269/02
by Bronisław SZEMIEL
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 22 November 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 applicant, Mr Bronisław Szemiel, is a Polish national who was born in 1914 and lives in Oborniki.
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. 3269/02
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows.
On 27 November 1945 the State Repatriation Office (Państwowy Urząd Repatryjacyjny) certified that the applicant’s family had abandoned real property in the territories beyond the Bug River.
On 28 November 2003 the Mayor of Trzebnica (Starosta) issued a decision confirming that the applicant’s family had the right to compensation for the property abandoned by their family, valued at 109,367 Polish zlotys (PLN). The applicant appealed against the Mayor decision.
On 5 February 2004 the Dolny Śląsk Governor quashed the Mayor decision and discontinued the proceedings.
The applicant lodged an appeal with the Regional Administration Court (Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny). On 17 June 2004 the applicant’s appeal was dismissed.
The 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).
The applicant initiated proceedings under the Law on the realisation of the right to compensation for property left beyond the present borders of the Polish State (Ustawa o realizacji prawa do rekompensaty z tytułu pozostawienia nieruchomości poza obecnymi granicami państwa polskiego) (“the July 2005 Act”) in order to obtain compensation for the Bug River property. On 26 March 2008 the Dolny Śląsk Governor issued a decision confirming that the applicant had the right to compensation for the property abandoned by his family.
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