European Court of Human Rights
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Bartosz LUCZAK v Poland - 22707/06 [2010] ECHR 764 (18 May 2010)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2010/764.html
Cite as: [2010] ECHR 764
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no.
22707/06
by Bartosz ŁUCZAK
against Poland
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 18 May 2010 as a Chamber composed of:
Nicolas
Bratza,
President,
Lech
Garlicki,
Giovanni
Bonello,
Ljiljana
Mijović,
Päivi
Hirvelä,
Ledi
Bianku,
Nebojša
Vučinić,
judges,
and Lawrence
Early, Section
Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 9 May 2006,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Bartosz Łuczak, is a Polish national who was born in 1981 and who is currently serving a prison sentence in the Wronki Prison in Poland.
The applicant, who had been granted legal aid, was represented before the Court by Mr L. Cyrson, a lawyer practising in Poznań. The Polish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr. J. Wołąsiewicz of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
A. Conditions of the applicant's detention
On 6 May 2002 the applicant was detained in the Poznań Remand Centre. On an unspecified date he was transferred to the Gębarzewo Prison. On 17 September 2003 he was transferred to the Wronki Prison where he is currently detained.
The applicant maintained that during his detention in the Wronki Prison he had developed a type of neurosis, namely an anxiety disorder (nerwica sytuacyjna), which had been caused by overcrowding, the overall bad conditions of detention and the lack of medical care.
The applicant submitted that the Wronki Prison was severely overcrowded. He had twice been held in a cell shared by 4 persons and three times in a cell shared by 7 persons. In each cell, there was less than 3 square metres of space per person. Prisoners had limited access to the telephone and visits from their relatives were restricted. There was no in house psychiatrist and the applicant did not receive sufficient medical treatment. Prisoners spent one hour per day outdoors, the rest of the time they remained in their cells.
On an unspecified date in November 2009 the applicant was transferred to a cell in which he enjoys the statutory 3 square metres of space per person.
B. Civil proceedings for compensation
On 20 January 2005 the applicant filed a civil action for compensation for the alleged deterioration of his mental health as a result of the overcrowding and the overall inadequate conditions of detention in the Wronki Prison.
On 25 March 2005 the Szamotuły District Court dismissed the applicant's request for legal aid, finding that the case was not of a complex nature and that the applicant was fit to present his own arguments before the court.
The applicant was present at a hearing held on 6 June 2005 and he was heard by the judge.
On 22 March 2006 the Szamotuły District Court dismissed the applicant's claim. The court relied on, inter alia, the applicant's own submissions and the report of a court appointed expert in psychiatry. Although it was established that the applicant had less than 3 square metres of space in the Wronki Prison and that he suffered from a personality disorder with progressive neurosis, the Szamotuły District Court held that there was no causal link between the applicant's condition and overcrowding in the prison. The court also found that the applicant's personality disorder was pre existing, whereas the neurosis was caused by the mere fact of incarceration rather than particular conditions in prison.
On 29 September 2006 the Poznań Regional Court dismissed the appeal. It subscribed to the reasoning of the first instance court.
A cassation appeal was not available to the applicant due to the low value of the claim.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complained under Article 3 of the Convention about the conditions of his detention in the Wronki Prison. He also complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the outcome of the proceedings for compensation.
PROCEDURE
On 1 and 15 February 2010 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against Poland in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay him 11,800 polish zlotys to cover any non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which 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 § 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 undertook 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.
THE LAW
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.
Lawrence Early Nicolas Bratza Registrar President