PROCEDURE

The case originated in two applications (nos. 15792/06 and 34043/05) 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 Iwona Subicka (“the applicant”), on 8 April 2005 and 23 August 2005, respectively.

The applicant, who had been granted legal aid, was represented by Mr K. Gotkowicz, a lawyer practising in Gdansk. The Polish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr J. Wołąsiewicz of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that the proceedings had been unfair in that she had been denied effective access to a court. She referred to the fact that the lawyers appointed under the legal-aid scheme had failed to represent her interests effectively in that they had refused to lodge with the Supreme Administrative Court cassation appeals against judgments given by the regional administrative court.

On 25 September and 10 October 2007 the President of the Fourth Section decided to give notice of the applications to the Government.

Given that the present two applications concerned two sets of proceedings raising a similar subject‑matter, the Court decided that the applications should be joined (see Rule 42 § 1 of the Rules of Court).

THE FACTS

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE

The applicant was born in 1954. She lives in Gdańsk‑Zaspa.

A. Application no. 15792/06 - the first set of administrative proceedings

By a judgment of 22 February 2006 the Gdańsk Regional Administrative Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal against a second-instance administrative decision by which she had been refused a monthly social assistance benefit.

On 8 March 2006 the applicant was granted, by a decision of a registry official, the assistance of a legal-aid lawyer for the purposes of lodging a cassation appeal with the Supreme Administrative Court.

On 10 March 2006 the judgment of 22 February 2006, together with its written grounds, was served on the applicant. On 14 March 2006 the decision on the grant of legal aid was served on her.

On 12 April 2006 the registry of the court requested the Gdańsk Bar Association to assign a lawyer to her case.

On 20 April 2006 the Bar Association informed the court that Mr J.B. had been assigned to represent the applicant. On 25 April the Bar Association informed the applicant accordingly and requested her to grant him an authority to act.

By a letter of 5 May 2006 the lawyer informed the applicant that he had found no legal grounds on which he could draft a cassation appeal. On 8 May 2006 he informed the court thereof.

B. Application no. 34043/0 - the second and third sets of administrative proceedings

1. The second set of administrative proceedings

By a judgment of 11 February 2004 the Gdańsk Regional Administrative Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal against a second-instance administrative decision by which she had been refused a monthly social assistance benefit.

This judgment, together with its written grounds, was served on the applicant on 5 March 2004. She was informed that the thirty‑day time‑limit for lodging a cassation appeal started to run on the date on which the judgment together with its written grounds was served on the party. It was therefore to expire on 4 April 2004.

On 10 March 2004 the applicant was granted legal aid by a decision of a registry official. This decision was sent to the applicant shortly afterwards.

On 25 March 2004 the local Bar Association informed the court in writing that Ms B. K.–Z. had been assigned to represent the applicant. Shortly afterwards the applicant was served with a copy of this letter.

By a letter dated 30 March 2004 the lawyer informed the court that she saw no grounds on which to prepare a cassation appeal. She did not inform the applicant about her refusal.

The applicant contacted the lawyer by phone on 6 July 2005. She was informed about the lawyer’s refusal to prepare a cassation appeal.

On 7 July 2005 the applicant complained to the Gdańsk Bar Association that the lawyer had failed to inform her about her refusal to prepare a cassation appeal against the judgment. She argued that the lawyer should have made reasonable efforts to inform her, as her legal‑aid client, of her decision. She submitted that she had learnt about the refusal a long time after the expiry of the time-limit for the lodging of a cassation appeal and only because she herself had contacted the lawyer.

By a letter of 16 August 2005 the Gdańsk Bar Association informed the applicant that it had investigated her complaint. It stated that the lawyer had been assigned to represent the applicant on 17 March 2004. She had examined the case file and found no grounds on which to prepare a cassation appeal. She subsequently informed the court of her refusal. In these circumstances, there were no grounds for accepting that the lawyer’s conduct had been negligent.

2. The third set of administrative proceedings

By two judgments of 25 May 2005 the Gdańsk Regional Administrative Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal against the two second-instance administrative decisions by which she had been refused a monthly social assistance benefit. She requested to be granted legal aid.

By a decision of 4 July 2005 the registry of the court granted her request.

On 6 July 2005 the judgments, together with their written grounds, were served on the applicant. She was informed that the thirty‑day time‑limit for lodging cassation appeals started to run on the date on which the judgments together with their written grounds were served on the party.

On 25 July 2005 the registry of the court requested the Gdańsk Bar Association to assign a lawyer to the case.

By a letter of 28 July 2005 the Bar Association informed the court in writing that Mr K. M. had been assigned to represent the applicant for the purposes of the cassation proceedings. A copy of this letter was also sent to the applicant.

By a legal opinion of 10 August 2005 the lawyer informed the court that he had found no grounds on which to prepare a cassation appeal against the judgments of 25 May 2005. The same opinion was sent on the same date to the applicant and to the Regional Bar Association.