FOURTH SECTION

DECISION

PILOT-JUDGMENT PROCEDURE

Application no. 21895/02 by Jan GĘBAL and Others 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 30 October 2001,

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 Gębal (the first applicant”), Ms Zyta Brodzka (the second applicant”) and Ms Halina Jaskulska (“the third applicant”) are Polish nationals. The first applicant was born in 1933 and lives in Gdańsk . The second and the third applicant s are sisters of the first applicant. They live in Aleksandrów Kujawski and Zielona Góra respectively.

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. 21895/02

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

On 19 January 1989 the Gdańsk Town Office ( Urzad Miejski ) issued a decision pursuant to which the first applicant was to be granted the right of perpetual use ( użytkowanie wieczyste ) of a plot in Gdańsk . However, the proceedings were discontinued on 11 April 1991.

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 25 June 2004 the fi rst applicant asked the Pomorze Governor (Wojewoda ) to issue a decision confirming the right to compensation for the abandoned property. The decision was issued on an unspecified date in 2006.

It emerges from the valuation report produced by the first applicant that the full value of the abandoned property amounted to 490 , 000 Polish zlotys (PLN) as of 15 August 2004.

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