Přehled

Text rozhodnutí
Datum rozhodnutí
17.1.2023
Rozhodovací formace
Významnost
3
Číslo stížnosti / sp. zn.

Rozhodnutí

FIRST SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 15150/21
Wiesław Krzysztof BORYSEWICZ
against Poland

The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 17 January 2023 as a Committee composed of:

Péter Paczolay, President,
Alena Poláčková,
Gilberto Felici, judges,
and Liv Tigerstedt, Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to:

the application (no. 15150/21) against the Republic of Poland lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on 9 March 2021 by a Polish national, Mr Wiesław Krzysztof Borysewicz, who was born in 1962 and is detained in Świdnica (“the applicant”) who had been granted legal aid and was represented by Mr J. Gondek, a lawyer practising in Kłodzko;

the decision to give notice of the application to the Polish Government (“the Government”), represented by their Agent, Mr J. Sobczak, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs;

the parties’ observations;

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

1. The present case concerns the allegedly inadequate conditions of the applicant’s detention in Kłodzko prison and the lack of medical care, as well as the inability for him to have his claim for compensation on that account examined by a court.

2. The applicant was detained in Kłodzko Prison between 2 February 2016 and 1 July 2020.

3. On 15 January 2019 he filed a claim for compensation against the State Treasury for the allegedly poor conditions of his detention. He also applied for a legal aid lawyer and an exemption from paying the applicable court fee.

4. On 6 August 2019 the Świdnica Regional Court partly allowed his request and exempted the applicant from the obligation to pay the court fee for the part exceeding 150 Polish zlotys (PLN). The applicant appealed.

5. On 22 January 2020 the Wrocław Court of Appeal upheld the firstinstance decision.

6. The applicant did not pay the court fee as required by the final decision.

7. Consequently, on 27 July 2020 the Świdnica Regional Court ordered that the claim be returned to the applicant (“zarządził zwrot pozwu”) since he had not paid the court fee. The order was served on the applicant on 27 August 2020.

8. On 16 October 2020 the court returned the applicant’s claim, by sending him a letter to which his statement of claim had been annexed.

9. The applicant dispatched his application to the Court on 9 March 2021.

10. The applicant complained under Article 3 of the Convention of the conditions of his detention and the lack of medical care. Under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, he complained that his right of access to a court was breached as the domestic courts denied his request for full exemption from the court fee.

THE COURT’S ASSESSMENT

11. The Government argued that the application was inadmissible on account of the applicant’s failure to lodge it within six months from the date on which the final decision was taken as required by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention. They further submitted that while the claim was returned to the applicant on 16 October 2020, this constituted a mere execution of an earlier final decision, i.e. of the court’s order to return the applicant’s statement of claim of 27 July 2020. The Government provided the Court with documents confirming the date of service of that decision on the applicant.

12. The applicant contested those arguments. In his application, he indicated the date on which the Świdnica Regional Court returned his claim, i.e. 16 October 2020, as dies a quo of the six-month period.

13. The relevant principles regarding the calculation of the six-month time-limit were set out in Sabri Güneş v. Turkey ([GC], no. 27396/06, §§ 3942 and 52-53, 29 June 2012).

14. The Court agrees with the Government that the six-month time-limit must be counted from the final domestic decision, not from the date that the applicant’s claim was returned to him. It further observes that the Government have successfully established that the final domestic decision in the applicant’s case was adopted on 27 July 2020 and was served on him on 27 August 2020. It follows that the deadline for submitting the application to the Court started to run on the latter date and expired on 27 February 2020. The applicant dispatched his application on 9 March 2021, thus after the expiry of the six-month period. It follows that the application has been lodged out of time.

15. Accordingly, the Court rejects the application in accordance with Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Declares the application inadmissible.

Done in English and notified in writing on 9 February 2023.

Liv Tigerstedt Péter Paczolay
Deputy Registrar President