FOURTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 5065/07 by Dariusz SAMBORSKI against Poland

The European Court of Human Rights ( Fourth Section ), sitting on 28 June 2011 as a Committee composed of:

Päivi Hirvelä , President, Ledi Bianku , Zdravka Kalaydjieva , judges, and Fatoş Aracı , Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 18 January 2007,

Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

PROC E DURE

The applicant, Mr Dariusz Samborski, is a Polish national who was born in 1973 and lives in Lubin . The Polish Government (“the Government ” ) were represented by their Agent, Mr J. Wołąs i ewicz of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs .

On 14 March 2011 the President of the Fourth Section of the Court decided to communicate under Article 3 of the Convention the applicant ’ s complaint about the conditions of his detention in Wrocław Remand Centre, in particular overcrowding and inadequate sanitary conditions .

THE LAW

On 10 May 2011 the Court received the following declaration from the Government:

“I, Jakub Wołąsiewicz , a gent of the Government , declare that the Gover nment of Poland offer to pay, Mr Dariusz Samborski , with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the Europ ean Court of Human Rights, PLN 7,500 (seven thousand five hundred Polish zlotys), plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant. The payment is intended to provide the applicant with redress for the systemic violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the conditions of his detention, in particular overcrowding, as identified by the Court in the pilot judgment given in the case of Orchowski v. Poland (no. 17885/04) on 22 October 2009 (see paragraphs 135 and 147 et seq.).

This sum will be payable within three months from the date of no tification of the decision 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 14 April 2011 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant :

“I, Dariusz Samborski , note that the Government of Poland are prepared to pay me, with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the Europe an Court of Human Rights, PLN 7 , 500 (seven thousand five hundred Polish zlotys), plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant. I further note that the payment constitutes redress for the systemic violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the conditions of my detention, in particular overcrowding, as identified by the Court in the pilot judgment given in the case of Orchowski v. Poland (no. 17885/04) on 22 October 2009 (see paragraphs 135 and 147 et seq.).

This sum will be payable within three months from the date of no tification of the decision 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 Päivi Hirvelä Deputy Registrar President