PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 43779/98) against the Republic of Poland lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights (“the Commission”) under former Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a Polish national, Zygmunt Mączyński (“the applicant”), on 6 April 1998.

The Polish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Krzysztof Drzewicki, from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The applicant alleged that the civil proceedings in his case were not concluded within a reasonable time in breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.

The application was transmitted to the Court on 1 November 1998, when Protocol No. 11 to the Convention came into force (Article 5 § 2 of Protocol No. 11).

The application was allocated to the Fourth Section of the Court (Rule 52 § 1 of the Rules of Court). Within that Section, the Chamber that would consider the case (Article 27 § 1 of the Convention) was constituted as provided in Rule 26 § 1 of the Rules of Court. On 1 November 2001 the Court effected a change in the composition of its Sections and the present case was re-allocated to the new Second Section.

In the meantime, by a decision of 21 June 2001, the Chamber of the former Fourth Section had declared the application admissible.

THE FACTS

The applicant was born in 1921 and lives in Michałowice, Poland.

In 1976 the applicant’s former wife lodged with the Pruszków District Court (Sąd Rejonowy) an action against the applicant in which she sought the distribution of the common property of their marriage.

Up to 30 April 1993, the Pruszków District Court held eighty-four hearings in the case.

Between 9 July 1993 and 7 April 1995 six hearings took place. During that period the parties filed pleadings with the trial court on eighteen occasions.

During the hearing held on 17 May 1995 the applicant made threats against the plaintiff’s counsel.

Between 11 June and 7 September 1995 the District Court held four hearings and received seven memorials from the parties. One of the memorials submitted by the applicant included a list of forty-one questions to the plaintiff.

On 14 September 1995 the applicant made a request to the Ombudsman that the case be transferred to another court. He also threatened that he would blow himself up with a grenade in the courtroom if his case were not decided in 1996.

On 12 March 1996 the President of the Pruszków District Court decided that, in view of the threats made by the applicant against the court and the plaintiff’s counsel, police officers should be present in the courtroom during the hearing scheduled for the next day. However, on 13 March 1996 the hearing was postponed because counsel for the plaintiff failed to attend.

According to the Government, the hearing fixed for 24 April 1996 was cancelled because on 27 March 1996 the applicant had challenged the presiding judge. The challenge was subsequently dismissed. The applicant submitted that the hearing had been adjourned because the plaintiff’s counsel had been absent.

On 2 July 1996 the applicant challenged all the judges of the Pruszków District Court, but subsequently he withdrew the challenge.

On 8 January 1997 the applicant asked the Vice-President of the Warsaw Regional Court (Sąd Wojewódzki) to transfer the case-file to the Pruszków District Court immediately. He pointed out that the Regional Court had decided his procedural request on 25 November 1996 and the case-file had been lying since then in the archives of the Regional Court. As a result, no judicial activity had taken place during that period. On 22 January 1997 the applicant visited the registry of the Warsaw Regional Court and repeated his complaint of 8 January 1997.

On 6 February 1997 the Vice-President of the Warsaw Regional Court informed the applicant that his complaint was well-founded and apologised to him for the delay in returning the case-file to the Pruszków District Court. He also advised the applicant that on 5 February 1997 the case-file had been transmitted to the District Court and a copy of the Regional Court’s decision of 25 November 1996 had been sent to him.

On 28 May 1997 the applicant filed with the trial court three requests concerning an expert witness and the disputed property.

Hearings took place on 28 May, 30 June and 6 August 1997. During the first of these hearings, the plaintiff replied to forty-one questions submitted by the applicant in 1995.

On 12 August 1997 the applicant filed with the trial court written pleadings concerning the distribution of the property.

On 22 August 1997 the Pruszków District Court ordered the applicant to allow the plaintiff access to a water supply on the contested property. The applicant appealed.

On 31 October 1997 the applicant requested the Pruszków District Court to transmit the case-file to the Warsaw Regional Court so that it could decide his appeal against a procedural decision taken by the District Court. On 12 November 1997 the applicant renewed his request in a letter addressed to the Vice-President of the Warsaw Regional Court. He also threatened that he would commit suicide in the courtroom and set fire to the court building if the proceedings in his case were not concluded speedily.

Between 16 July 1998 and 26 May 1999 the District Court held four hearings and issued one decision. During that time, the court received written pleadings on six occasions.

On 3 April 2000 the applicant filed with the District Court written pleadings setting out his terms for a settlement of the case.

On 27 November 2000 the applicant challenged all the judges of the Pruszków District Court.

The proceedings are apparently still pending.