FOURTH SECTION

DECISION

PILOT-JUDGMENT PROCEDURE

Application no. 21499/08 by Jan PIŃSKI and Aleksander PIŃSKI against Poland

The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 23 September 2008 as a Chamber composed of:

Nicolas Bratza, President, Lech Garlicki, Giovanni Bonello, Ljiljana Mijović, David Thór Björgvinsson, Ján Šikuta, Päivi Hirvelä, judges, and Lawrence Early, Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 2 April 2008,

Having regard to the decision to apply the pilot-judgment procedure and to adjourn its consideration of applications deriving from the same systemic problem identified in the case of Broniowski v. Poland (no. 31443/96),

Having regard to the decisions to strike the applications Wolkenberg and Others v. Poland (no. 50003/99) and Witkowska-Toboła v. Poland (no. 11208/02) out of the Court ’ s list of cases,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicants, Mr Jan Piński (“the first applicant”) and Mr Aleksander Piński (“the second applicant”) are Polish nationals who were born in 1979 and 197 7 respectively and live in Wars aw . They were represented before the Court by Mr R. Nowosiel ski, a lawyer practising in Gdań sk .

A. Historical background to Bug River cases before the Court

(See E.G. v. Poland , no. 50425/99, §§ 2-5) .

B. Particular circumstances of case no. 21499/08

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.

On an unspecified date in 1990 the applicants ’ father asked the Warsaw District Office ( Urząd Rejonowy ) to enable him to acquire State property in compensation for the property abandoned in the territories beyond the Bug River . The authorities repeatedly informed him that at that time there was no State property that could be designated for the realisation of his claim.

The applicants ’ subsequent attempts to acquire State property were unsuccessful. The only possibility of enforcing the claim was to participate in competitive bids for the sale of State property. However, the State authorities throughout Poland officially acknowledged the acute shortage of State-owned land designated for the realisation of the Bug River claims.

This fact and the fact that at the material time it was the authorities ’ common practice to desist from organising auctions for Bug River claimants or to openly deny them the opportunity to enforce their entitlement through the statutory bidding procedure was established by the Court in the Broniowski judgment (see Broniowski , cited above, §§ 48-61, 69-87 and 168-176).

On 10 August 1999 date the applicants lodged a claim for compensation for the Bug River property against the State Treasury. On 11 October 2007 the Warsaw Court of Appeal dismissed the action as unsubstantiated.

According to the applicants ’ own estimations the value of the original property amounted to 1,200,000 Polish zlotys (PLN).

The applicants did not inform the Court whether they had initiated proceedings under the Law on the realisation of the right to compensation for property left beyond the present borders of the Polish State ( Ustawa o realizacji prawa do rekompensaty z tytułu pozostawienia nieruchomości poza obecnymi granicami państwa polskiego ) (“the July 2005 Act”) in order to obtain compensation for the Bug River property.

C . Relevant domestic law and practice in respect of Bug River claims

(See E.G. v. Poland , no. 50425 /99, §§ 16-17 ) .

COMPLAINT

(See E.G. v. Poland , no. 50425 /99, § 18 ) .

THE LAW

(See E.G. v. Poland , no. 50425 /99, §§ 19-29 ) .

For these reasons, the Court unanimously

1. Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases;

2. Decides to close the pilot-judgment procedure applied in respect of the Bug River applications in the case of Broniowski v. Poland (no. 31443/96).

Lawrence Early Nicolas Bratza Registrar President