PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 12253/03) against the Republic of Poland lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a Polish national, Ms Barbara Ratyńska (“the applicant”), on 3 April 2003.

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

On 17 September 2007 the President of the Fourth Section of the Court decided to give notice of the application to the Government. Applying Article 29 § 3 of the Convention, it was decided to rule on the admissibility and merits of the application at the same time.

THE FACTS

I THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE

The applicant was born in 1931 and lives in Warszawa.

A. Background of the case

The applicant’s testators owned a piece of real property in Warsaw. By virtue of the 1945 Decree on the Ownership and Use of Land in Warsaw (Dekret o własności i użytkowaniu gruntów na obszarze m. st. Warszawy) all land in Warsaw was nationalised. The applicant’s testators filed an application for the grant of a right of perpetual use of the real property. On 6 July 1972 the Board of the Warsaw National Council (Prezydium Rady Narodowej) refused the application. On 12 February 1973 the competent Minister upheld that decision. Simultaneously, the applicant’s testators lodged a claim for compensation. On 22 November 1972 the Board of the Warsaw National Council dismissed the claim as according to the 1957 Law on exclusion of detached houses and apartments in housing cooperatives’ buildings from public management (Ustawa o wyłączeniu spod publicznej gospodarki lokalami domów jednorodzinnych oraz lokali w domach spółdzielni mieszkaniowych), the real property in question was not a detached house. Consequently, the 1965 Cabinet Resolution allowing for nationalised detached houses to be compensated was not applicable. The applicant’s testators appealed unsuccessfully against this decision.

B. Administrative proceedings for compensation

On 24 February 1997 the applicant instituted administrative proceedings against the State Treasury for compensation for nationalised family real property.

It appears that on several occasions between 1997 and 2000 the applicant lodged complaints, alleging inactivity on the part of the first‑instance authority.

On 25 February 2000 the Mayor of Warsaw District informed the applicant that the administrative proceedings were in their final stage and in the near future a decision would be issued ordering valuation of the real property. Consequently, the assessment of the amount of compensation would then be possible.

On an unspecified date the applicant lodged a complaint about inactivity on the part of the Mayor of the Warsaw District with the Supreme Administrative Court.

On 17 November 2000 the Supreme Administrative Court admitted that the proceedings in question had been lengthy and ordered the Mayor to deal with the case within two months of the judgment being served on the parties. The court stated that the relevant organ had not only failed to issue any decision as to the merits during the proceedings in question but had also failed to justify its delay.

On 9 February 2001 the Warszawa District Governor discontinued the relevant proceedings. He stated that the legal regime governing compensation for the expropriation of detached houses had not changed since 1957. Therefore, if a valid decision had been taken in 1972, a re‑examination of the case between the same parties and about the same claim was inadmissible. The applicant appealed against this decision.

On 18 March 2002 the Mazowiecki Governor dismissed the applicant’s appeal concluding in line with the contested District Governor’s decision.

On 27 November 2003 the Supreme Administrative Court dismissed the applicant’s cassation appeal.

C. Administrative proceedings for restoration of the plot of land

On 21 December 2004 the applicant instituted administrative proceedings in order to have a plot of land on which the real property was situated restored to her.

It results from the case file that the relevant proceedings are still pending before the Minister of Infrastructure.