FIRST SECTION
\nDECISION<\/p>\n
Application no.36275\/15
\nMariusz S\u0141OMKA
\nagainst Poland<\/p>\n
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 26\u00a0March 2019 as a Committee composed of:<\/p>\n
Ale\u0161Pejchal, President,
\nTim Eicke,
\nJovan Ilievski, judges,<\/p>\n
and Renata Degener, Deputy Section Registrar,<\/p>\n
Having regard to the above application lodged on 16 July 2015,<\/p>\n
Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government on 24 October 2018 requesting the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases,<\/p>\n
Having deliberated, decides as follows:<\/p>\n
FACTS AND PROCEDURE<\/strong><\/p>\n 1.\u00a0\u00a0The applicant, Mr MariuszS\u0142omka, is a Polish national who was born in 1979 and lives in \u0141\u0119czna. He was represented before the Court by Mr\u00a0P.\u00a0Rzeszutko, a lawyer practising in Lublin.<\/p>\n 2.\u00a0\u00a0The Polish Government (\u201cthe Government\u201d) were represented by their Agent, Ms\u00a0J.\u00a0Chrzanowska and subsequently by Mr\u00a0J.\u00a0Sobczak, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.<\/p>\n 3.\u00a0\u00a0On 4 August 2010 the applicant had a road accident, in which he was seriously injured. On 6 August 2010, still in hospital, the applicant was questioned by the authorities in the absence of a\u00a0lawyer and under the influence of narcotic painkillers. The applicant confessed to driving under the influence of alcohol and causing the accident in which one person died and two were injured. On 9\u00a0December 2013 the District Court sentenced the applicant to five years and six months\u2019 imprisonment, imposed a\u00a0driving ban of eight years and ordered him to cover the costs of the proceedings for the auxiliary prosecutors. The trial court relied, among other evidence, on the applicant\u2019s confession. The judgment was upheld upon appeal.<\/p>\n 4.\u00a0\u00a0The applicant complained under Article 6 \u00a7\u00a7 1 and 3 (b) and (c) of the Convention about the lack of fair hearing on account of lack of time and facilities to prepare defence and inability to defend himself or through legal assistance in the above-mentioned proceedings.<\/p>\n 5.\u00a0\u00a0The application had been communicated to the Government.<\/p>\n THE LAW<\/strong><\/p>\n 6.\u00a0\u00a0After the failure of attempts to reach a friendly settlement, by a\u00a0letter of 24\u00a0October 2018 the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make a unilateral declaration with a view to resolving the issue raised by the application. They further requested the Court to strike out the application in accordance with Article 37 of the Convention.<\/p>\n 7.\u00a0\u00a0The declaration provided as follows:<\/p>\n \u201cThe Government hereby wish to express \u2013 by way of the unilateral declaration \u2013 their acknowledgement of the lack of a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against the applicant in breach of Article 6 \u00a7 1 of the Convention, of the absence of adequate time and facilities to prepare his defence in breach of Article\u00a06 \u00a7 3 (b) of the Convention and of the fact that the applicant was not able to defend himself or through legal assistance of his own choosing in breach of Article 6 \u00a7\u00a03\u00a0(c) of the Convention. Simultaneously, they declare that they are ready to pay the applicant the sum of PLN\u00a08,000 (eight thousand Polish zlotys) which they consider to be reasonable in the light of the individual circumstances of the present case, as well as the Court\u2019s case-law in similar cases … The sum referred to above, which is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage, as well as costs and expenses, will be free of any taxes that may be applicable. It will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 \u00a7 1 of the Convention. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three-month period, the Government undertake to pay simple interest on it, from expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default periods plus three percentage points.<\/p>\n The Government respectfully suggest that the above declaration might be accepted by the Court as “any other reason” justifying the striking out of the case of the Court\u2019s lists of cases, as referred to in Article 37 \u00a7 1 (c) of the Convention.\u201d<\/p>\n 8.\u00a0\u00a0The applicant did not comment on the Government\u2019s proposal.<\/p>\n 9.\u00a0\u00a0The Court reiterates that Article\u00a037 of the Convention provides that it may at any stage of the proceedings decide to strike an application out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to one of the conclusions specified, under (a), (b) or (c) of paragraph 1 of that Article. Article\u00a037\u00a0\u00a7\u00a01\u00a0(c) enables the Court in particular to strike a case out of its list if:<\/p>\n \u201cfor any other reason established by the Court, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application\u201d.<\/p>\n 10.\u00a0\u00a0It also reiterates that in certain circumstances, it may strike out an application under Article\u00a037\u00a0\u00a7\u00a01\u00a0(c) on the basis of a unilateral declaration by a respondent Government even if the applicant wishes the examination of the case to be continued.<\/p>\n 11.\u00a0\u00a0To this end, the Court has examined the declarationin the light of the principles emerging from its case-law, in particular the TahsinAcar judgment (Tahsin Acar v. Turkey (preliminary objections) [GC], no.\u00a026307\/95, \u00a7\u00a7 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; WAZA Sp. z o.o. v. Poland (dec.), no.\u00a011602\/02, 26 June 2007; and Sulwi\u0144ska v. Poland (dec.), no.\u00a028953\/03, 18\u00a0September 2007).<\/p>\n 12.\u00a0\u00a0The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Poland, its practice concerning complaints about a violation of the right to a fair hearing, to have adequate time and facilities to prepare defence and the right to defend oneself in person or through legal assistance (see, for example, Salduz v. Turkey[GC], no. 36391\/02, ECHR 2008; Pishchalnikov v. Russia, no. 7025\/04, 24 September 2009; P\u0142onka v.\u00a0Poland, no. 20310\/02, 31 March 2009; and Durmus v. Poland (dec.), no.\u00a039058\/17, 27 June 2017).<\/p>\n 13.\u00a0\u00a0Having regard to the nature of the admissions contained in the Government\u2019s declaration, as well as the amount of compensation proposed \u2013 which is consistent with the amounts awarded in similar cases \u2013 the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application (Article\u00a037\u00a0\u00a7\u00a01\u00a0(c)).<\/p>\n 14.\u00a0\u00a0Moreover, in light of the above considerations, and in particular given the clear and extensive case-law on the topic, the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the application (Article\u00a037 \u00a7 1 in fine).<\/p>\n 15.\u00a0\u00a0Finally, the Court emphasises that, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declaration, the application could be restored to the list in accordance with Article\u00a037 \u00a7 2 of the Convention (Josipovi\u0107 v. Serbia (dec.), no. 18369\/07, 4\u00a0March 2008).<\/p>\n 16.\u00a0\u00a0In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list.<\/p>\n For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,<\/p>\n Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government\u2019s declaration under Article 6 \u00a7\u00a7 1 and 3 (b) and (c) of the Convention and of the modalities for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein;<\/p>\n Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases in accordance with Article\u00a037\u00a0\u00a7\u00a01\u00a0(c) of the Convention.<\/p>\n Done in English and notified in writing on 18 April 2019.<\/p>\n Renata Degener\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Ale\u0161 Pejchal
\nDeputy Registrar\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 President<\/p>\n