Communicated on 3 September 2015

FOURTH SECTION

Application no. 67636/12 Krzysztof WOŹNIAK against Poland lodged on 25 September 2012

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant, Mr Krzysztof Woźniak , is a Polish national, who was born in 1971 and lives in Skierniewice .

The circumstances of the case

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

The applicant suffers from Guillain – Barré syndrome (GBS), a rapid ‑ onset weakness of the limbs resulting from an acute disease of peripheral nerves . He uses a walker.

From 19 September 2008 until 19 July 2012 the applicant was deprived of liberty.

From 22 September 2009 until 9 September 2010 he was committed to Łowicz Prison, cell no. 618.

The applicant ’ s cell measured 12.3 square metres and was shared by him with a person with a back ailment using crutches; a leg-amputee using crutches and one physically fit person (3.075 square metres per person).

The cell had a sanitary annex with a toilet and a washbasin with a cold water tap. It was equipped with four beds (and presumably, with cupboards , a table and stools ) . In the applicant ’ s opinion, the cells ’ living space was significantly reduced by the furniture and the cellmates using walking aids had a difficulty moving around. The cell and the toilet were adapted for special needs prisoners in that they had wide doors, wall grips and wheelchair ramps.

The cell in question was open all day long and prisoners could walk around prison premises. The applicant also had a 3-hour outdoor exercise every day and access to a shower room twice a week.

The applicant ’ s medical records reveal that during his four ‑ year ‑ detention he had been examined more than 116 times by the prison ’ s general practitioner, dentist, psychologist, orthopaedist, radiologist neurologist, physiotherapist and doctors of other specialties.

On 28 July 2010 the applicant filed a civil action for compensation in the amount of PLN 10,000 (EUR 2,500) on account of, inter alia , overcrowding and inadequate medical treatment during his detention. As to the latter, the applicant argued that he had not been prescribed a medicine necessary to stimulate the growth of his muscles in view of his atrophy.

The applicant submitted that the defendant ’ s reply to his civil action had been hand-delivered to him no earlier than at the court ’ s hearing (date unspecified). Consequently, the applicant did not have time or facilities to prepare his rebuttal.

On 21 November 2011 the Łowicz District Court dismissed the applicant ’ s action on the ground that the statutory minimum standard of 3 square metres had been secured to the applicant in Łowicz Prison. In addition, the domestic court found it important that the applicant had had two showers per week and a bed which he had not shared with any cellmate. It was also held that medical care which had been secured to the applicant in prison had been adequate and that the applicant had never asked the prison administration for a particular medicine or procedure.

The applicant ’ s lawyer appealed on the ground of error of fact.

On 14 May 2012 the Łódź Regional Court dismissed the appeal. The reasoning of the judgment was not obtained by the applicant.

Cassation appeal was not available to the applicant.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complains , invoking Article 14 of the Convention, that the living conditions and medical care secured to him in Łowicz Prison were inadequate in view of his special needs . He also complains, invoking Article 13 of the Convention, about inequality of arms during the civil proceedings for compensation.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Having regard to the nature of the applicant ’ s disability and his special needs; the living space in cell no. 618 and the over all conditions of the applicant ’ s detention , h as there been a breach of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the authorities ’ failure to secure to the applicant adequate conditions of detention from 22 September 200 9 until 9 September 2010 ?

2. In view of the above, h as the applicant suffered discrimination on the ground of the conditions of his detention , contrary t o Article 14 of the Convention read in conjunction with Article 3 ?

3. The Government are requested to produce the following information: (a) the size of cell no. 618 without the toilet annex; (b) the surface taken up by all the furniture and equipment in this cell; (c) the size of the walking aids used by the applicant and his two fellow inmates with disabilities; and (d) whether the applicant used the opportunity of leaving his cell to move around the prison premises or to go to the outdoor yard.

4. The Government are also instructed to provide a plan of the Łowicz Prison ’ s building and premises, indicating, in particular: (a) on which floor cell no. 618 was situated ; (b) how the outdoor yard was accessible to the applicant; and (c) how the other parts of the building were accessible to the applicant.