PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 69129/01) 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, Anna Białas (“the applicant”).

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

On 13 October 2005 the Court decided to communicate the application. Applying Article 29 § 3 of the Convention, it 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 1922 and lives in Tarnowska Wola.

On 23 February 1989 the applicant filed an action with the Tarnobrzeg District Court in which she sought a court order against third parties requiring them to remove an electricity cable they had installed on her land.

Between May and August 1989 three hearings were held. An expert opinion was submitted to the court during that period.

As the parties were subsequently invited to settle the case, between 15 November 1990 and 6 May 1991 the proceedings were stayed at their request in order to negotiate a settlement.

On 29 June 1991 the Tarnobrzeg District Court delivered a judgment dismissing the applicant’s action. The applicant appealed on 28 August 1991.

At the appeal hearing of 28 October 1991 the Tarnobrzeg Regional Court decided to stay the proceedings pending the termination of other proceedings for the establishment of the defendant’s ownership of the land. Those proceedings ended on 26 October 1998 with the Supreme Court’s decision rejecting the applicant’s cassation appeal as inadmissible.

On 3 December 1999 the proceedings were resumed upon the applicant’s request of 16 November 1999.

On 23 December 1999 the Tarnobrzeg Regional Court quashed the first-instance judgment and remitted the case for re-examination, indicating the need to obtain an expert opinion on the exact route of the electricity line across the land.

A hearing was held on 9 February 2000; the court ordered the preparation of the expert opinion and ordered the applicant to pay the expert’s fee within 14 days.

Between February and April 2000 the applicant repeatedly sought exemption from payment of the expert’s fee. She was ordered to pay the fee, failing which the evidence provided by the expert opinion would be excluded. The applicant failed to comply with the order.

On 31 May 2000 the Tarnobrzeg District Court decided to omit the evidence contained in the expert opinion. It examined as evidence the case files of three other sets of related proceedings and on that basis delivered a judgment dismissing the action.

On 7 September 2000 the Tarnobrzeg Regional Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal. The court agreed with the first-instance court that the defendant had the right of co-ownership to the plot on the date on which the proceedings were instituted and that the applicant’s claim was accordingly inadmissible.