FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 3849/05
by Sebastian SZYMAŃSKI
against Poland
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 5 July 2011 as a Chamber composed of:
Nicolas Bratza, President,
Lech Garlicki,
Ljiljana Mijović,
Sverre Erik Jebens,
Zdravka Kalaydjieva,
Nebojša Vučinić,
Vincent A. De Gaetano, judges,
and Lawrence Early, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 5 January 2005,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Sebastian Szymański, is a Polish national who was born in 1981 and lives in Warszawa. The Polish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Jakub Wołąsiewicz of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The applicant complained under Article 3 of the Convention about the overcrowding and inadequate conditions of his detention.
The application was communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. Subsequently, the applicant submitted his own observations and just satisfaction claims.
A friendly settlement procedure was put in place following the pilot judgment in the case of Orchowski v. Poland, no. 17885/04, ECHR 2009‑... (extracts) and the leading decision in the case of Łatak v. Poland (no. 52070/08) on 12 October 2010.
By letter dated 25 November 2010, sent to his home address, the applicant was invited to inform the Registry whether he accepted the friendly-settlement proposal and, if so, to return the enclosed declaration, duly dated and signed. The period allowed for submission of the applicant’s position on the friendly settlement expired on 7 December 2010. No reply has been received.
By two letters dated 25 January 2011, sent by registered post to the applicant’s home address and to Warszawa Remand Centre, the applicant was once more informed about the friendly-settlement proposal. Moreover, his attention was drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike a case out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. The letter sent to the applicant’s home address was collected by a certain A.M. on 31 January 2011. The letter sent to the remand centre was collected by the applicant on an unspecified date. However, no response has been received.
The Government accepted the friendly settlement proposal and returned a signed declaration on 7 December 2010.
THE LAW
The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue his application, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. Furthermore, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 in fine, the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the continued examination of the case.
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