BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
European Court of Human Rights |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Beata WISNIEWSKA v Poland - 60519/08 [2011] ECHR 878 (17 May 2011) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2011/878.html Cite as: [2011] ECHR 878 |
||
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no.
60519/08
by Beata WIŚNIEWSKA
against Poland
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 17 May 2011 as a Committee composed of:
Ljiljana
Mijović,
President,
Lech
Garlicki,
Zdravka
Kalaydjieva,
judges,
and
Fatoş Aracı, Deputy
Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 2 December 2008,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
The applicant, Ms Beata Wiśniewska, is a Polish national who was born in 1968 and lives in Bogatynia. The Polish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr J. Wołąsiewicz of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
On 17 May 2010 the President of the Fourth Section of the Court decided to communicate under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention the applicant’s complaint concerning the length of the criminal investigation against her, which lasted for three years and some nine months.
THE LAW
On 13 July 2010 the Court received the following declaration from the Government:
“I, Jakub Wołąsiewicz, Agent of the Government, declare that the Government of Poland offer to pay PLN 8,400 (eight thousand four hundred Polish zlotys) to Ms Beata Wiśniewska with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
This sum, 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 and will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. 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 period plus three percentage points. The payment will constitute the final resolution of the case.”
On 25 June 2010 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant:
“I, Beata Wiśniewska, note that the Government of Poland are prepared to pay me the sum of PLN 8,400 (eight thousand four hundred Polish zlotys) with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
This sum, 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 and will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. From the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
I accept the proposal and waive any further claims against Poland in respect of the facts giving rise to this application. I declare that this constitutes a final resolution of the case.”
The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention).
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.
Fatoş Aracı Ljiljana Mijović
Deputy
Registrar President