CONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGE MIJOVIĆ

As was emphasis ed i n my previous concurring opinion s in three recent cases ( Kulikowski v. Poland , n o 18353/03, 18 August 2009, Antonicelli v. Poland , n o 2815/05, 18 August 2009 and ArciÅ„ ski v. Poland , 41373/04, 15 September 2009), as well as in the joint dissenting opinion in Smyk v. Poland , n o 8958/04, 28 July 2009 , I see the problem of the refusal of lawyers appointed under a legal - aid scheme to represent legally ‑ aided persons on the ground that the claim has no reasonable prospects of success , as the general one, related not only to criminal, but also to both civil and administrative proceedings [1] . For the purposes of the instant case, I would simply refer to the detailed reasoning of those opinions.

[1] 1. There are a significant number of such cases pending before the European Court of Human Rights