Communicated on 9 February 2017
FOURTH SECTION
Application no. 36600/13
Jacek WRÓBLEWSKI
against Poland
lodged on 14 May 2013
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The applicant, Mr Jacek Wróblewski, is a Polish national who was born in 1971 and lives in Pabianice.
A. The circumstances of the case
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
The applicant has been detained in prison facilities since 2005.
1. Proceedings for compensation
On 1 October 2012 the applicant filed a civil claim with the Łódź‑Śródmieście District Court against L.W-A., the legal-aid lawyer assigned to him for the purpose of preparing and lodging a cassation appeal in the criminal proceedings against him.
In his statement of claim the applicant provided the address of the law firm where the lawyer was employed.
By an order of 22 October 2012 the applicant was instructed to provide the court with the defendant’s home address (adres zamieszkania) within seven days.
By an order of 21 November 2012 the President of the II Civil Division of the Łódź-Śródmieście District Court returned the applicant’s statement of claim, referring to Article 126 § 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. She noted that the applicant had failed to comply with the order of 22 October 2012.
The applicant appealed. He argued that it was sufficient to indicate in his statement of claim the address of the law firm where the defendant worked. This address had been used in his previous correspondence with the lawyer. Furthermore, he submitted that he had had difficulties in trying to establish the lawyer’s home address, given that he had been in detention for seven years.
On 23 March 2013 the Łódź Regional Court dismissed the applicant’s interlocutory appeal. It found that the formal shortcomings which the applicant had failed to rectify by not providing the court with the defendant’s home address had constituted an obstacle to the examination of the merits of his statement of claim pursuant to Article 130 § 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
2. Disciplinary proceedings
On 13 February 2012 the applicant lodged a complaint about L.W-A. with the Łódź Bar Association.
On 4 October 2013 the Łódź Regional Bar Disciplinary Court imposed a penalty of censure (upomnienie) on L.W-A. It found the applicant’s allegations of a lack of due diligence on the part of L.W-A. well-founded.
B. Relevant domestic law
Article 25 of the Civil Code provides:
“The place of residence of a natural person shall be deemed to be the town where that person stays with the intention of remaining permanently.”
Article 126 of the Code of Civil Procedure specifies what information should be contained in a pleading. Paragraph 2 provides in particular, that the first pleading submitted to a court should indicate the parties’ place of residence (miejsce zamieszkania).
Article 135 § 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides as follows:
“Service may be effected at home, at work or where an addressee is found.”
Paragraph 2 of this Article provides that, if so requested by a party, service may be effected at a post-office box address.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complains under Article 6 of the Convention that he has been deprived of access to a court for determination of his civil rights on account of the fact that he did not indicate the home address of the lawyer even though the address indicated by him was the address of the law firm where the lawyer worked and which she had used when contacting him.
QUESTION TO THE PARTIES
Was the applicant’s right to effective “access to a court”, guaranteed by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, ensured in the present case, especially in view of the fact that the domestic court, relying on Article 126 § 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, refused to entertain his claim for compensation on account of his failure to provide the court with the defendant’s home addresses?
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy