FIRST SECTION
\nDECISION
\nApplications nos. 60521\/09 and 6016\/13
\nGrzegorz Jacek SKOWRO\u0143SKI
\nagainst Poland<\/p>\n
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 16\u00a0January 2018 as a Committee composed of:<\/p>\n
Ale\u0161 Pejchal, President,
\nKrzysztof Wojtyczek,
\nJovan Ilievski, judges,
\nand Renata Degener, Deputy Section Registrar,<\/p>\n
Having regard to the above applications lodged on 29 October 2009 and 21\u00a0December 2012 respectively,<\/p>\n
Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government on 3 March 2016 requesting the Court to strike the application no.\u00a060521\/09 out of the list of cases and the applicant\u2019s reply to that declaration,<\/p>\n
Having deliberated, decides as follows:<\/p>\n
FACTS AND PROCEDURE<\/strong><\/p>\n 1.\u00a0\u00a0The applicant, Mr Grzegorz Jacek Skowro\u0144ski, is a Polish national, who was born in 1975 and is detained in Brzeg. In the first application he was represented before the Court by Ms J. Grudzie\u0144.<\/p>\n 2.\u00a0\u00a0The Polish Government (\u201cthe Government\u201d) were represented by their Agent, Ms J. Chrzanowska, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.<\/p>\n 3.\u00a0\u00a0The applicant complained under Article 6 \u00a7 1 of the Convention about the excessive length of three sets of proceedings and under Article 13 of the Convention about the lack of, or insufficient, redress for the excessive length of proceedings granted to them by the national courts<\/p>\n 4.\u00a0\u00a0On 7 July 2015 the applications were communicated to the Polish Government pursuant to Rule 54 \u00a7 2 (b) of the Rules of Court, by virtue of the ninth operative provision of the pilot-judgment given in the case of Rutkowski and Others v. Poland (see Rutkowski and Others v. Poland, nos.\u00a072287\/10 and 2 others, \u00a7\u00a7 223-228 and the ninth operative provision, 7\u00a0July 2015).<\/p>\n 5.\u00a0\u00a0By letter dated 3 March 2016 the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make declaration with a view to resolving the issues raised by the application no. 60521\/09. The Government acknowledged a violation of Article 6 \u00a7\u00a01 on account of the excessive length of three sets of proceedings complained of by the applicant and violation of Article 13 on account of the lack of an effective remedy, securing sufficient redress for a\u00a0violation of Article\u00a06 \u00a7 1. They offered payment of the following sums: 6,570 Polish zlotys (PLN) in respect of the first set of proceedings, PLN\u00a08,470 in respect of the second set of proceedings and PLN 8,890 in respect of the third set of proceedings. The Government further undertook to adopt a range of general measures in respect of other persons who were victims of similar violations or might be affected by similar violations in the future. The sums referred to above are to cover any pecuniary and non\u2011pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, will be free of any taxes that may be applicable. They will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article\u00a037 \u00a7\u00a01 of the Convention. In the event of failure to pay these sums within the said three-month period, the Government undertake to pay simple interest on each of them, 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. In addition, the Government made a declaration on general measures to be adopted in implementation of the Rutkowski and Others pilot judgment (see Za\u0142uska and Rogalska v.\u00a0Poland and 398 other applications (dec.), nos. 53491\/10 and 72286\/10, \u00a7\u00a7 23-25, 20\u00a0June 2017). They further requested the Court to strike out the application in accordance with Article\u00a037 of the Convention.<\/p>\n THE LAW<\/strong><\/p>\n 6.\u00a0\u00a0Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision.<\/p>\n 7.\u00a0\u00a0By letter of 6 May 2016 the applicant indicated that he was not satisfied with the terms of the unilateral declaration.<\/p>\n 8.\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 \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 9.\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 applicants wish the examination of the case to be continued.<\/p>\n 10.\u00a0\u00a0To this end, the Court has examined the declaration in the light of the principles emerging from its case-law, in particular the Tahsin Acar 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. 11602\/02, 26\u00a0June\u00a02007; and Sulwi\u0144ska v. Poland (dec.), no. 28953\/03, 18\u00a0September\u00a02007).<\/p>\n 11.\u00a0\u00a0The conclusions reached by the Court on admissions and undertakings contained in the Government\u2019s declarations in the first group of 400 cases submitted in the pilot-judgment procedure apply to the present case (see Za\u0142uska and Rogalska (dec), cited above, \u00a7\u00a7 51-53).<\/p>\n 12.\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 13.\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 37 \u00a7 1 in fine).<\/p>\n 14.\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 15.\u00a0\u00a0In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list.<\/p>\n For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,<\/p>\n Decides to join the applications;<\/p>\n Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government\u2019s declaration in the application no. 60521\/09 under Articles 6 \u00a7 1 and 13 of the Convention and of the modalities for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein;<\/p>\n Decides to strike the applications 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 8 February 2018.<\/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\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\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 President<\/p>\n