PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (nos. 12193/02) 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, Mr Józef Majcher (“the applicant”), on 15 October 2001.

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

On 30 November 2006 the President of the Fourth Section 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 1934 and lives in Rzeszów.

A. Judicial proceedings

1. Facts before 1 May 1993

In 1987 the applicant’s wife filed a petition for divorce. The divorce was granted shortly afterwards.

On 24 November 1987 the applicant lodged a claim for the division of matrimonial property with the Łańcut District Court (Sąd Rejonowy).

On 31 December 1988 the Łańcut District Court gave a decision and divided the property.

On an unspecified date the applicant appealed.

On 7 November 1989 the Rzeszów Regional Court (Sąd Okręgowy) remitted the case.

2. Facts after 1 May 1993

On 10 March 1998 the Łańcut District Court again gave a decision.

On unspecified dates both parties appealed.

On 11 September 1998 the Rzeszów Regional Court dismissed both appeals.

On 23 October 1998 the applicant lodged a cassation appeal with the Supreme Court (Sąd Najwyższy).

On 14 May 2001 the Supreme Court refused to hear the applicant’s cassation appeal.

The applicant submitted that as a consequence of the prolonged proceedings in his case he had been deprived of his property and had to live in a Welfare Home (Dom Pomocy Społecznej).

B. Enforcement proceedings

On an unspecified date the applicant instituted enforcement proceedings against his wife who apparently had failed to comply with the final decision on the division of their property.

On 6 May 1999 the Łańcut Bailiff informed the applicant that the enforcement had proved ineffective.

On 10 May 1999 the applicant lodged a complaint with the Łańcut District Court against the actions taken by the bailiff (skarga na czynności komornika). He submitted that those actions had been incorrect, because the money obtained from the debtor had been distributed wrongly. He also complained about the ineffectiveness of the enforcement.

On 21 July 1999 the Łańcut District Court dismissed his complaint. It held that the order of distribution had been in accordance with the Code of Civil Procedure. As regards the ineffectiveness of the enforcement, the court held that no valuable objects had been found in the debtor’s house which could be sold and used to satisfy the debt.

On an unspecified date the applicant appealed.

On 21 July 1999 the Rzeszów Regional Court dismissed his appeal.