Kalicki v. Poland

FOURTH SECTION

Application no. 64411/09 Henryk KALICKI against Poland

The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 5 December 2013 as a Committee composed of:

George Nicolaou, President, Krzysztof Wojtyczek , Faris Vehabović, judges, and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 16 November 2009,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant, Mr Henryk Kalicki, is a Polish national, who was born in 1969 and lives in Ścinawa Mała.

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

The applicant mainly complained under Article 3 of the Convention about the conditions of his detention.

The applicant’s complaint under Article 3 was communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant, who was invited to submit his claims for just satisfaction. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.

By letter dated 8 August 2013, sent by registered post to Grodków Prison, which was the applicant’s last known address, the applicant was notified that no reply to the last letter had been received. The applicant’s attention was drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike a case out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application.

On 4 September 2013 the letter was returned to the Registry with an annotation, apparently from a prison administration, informing that the applicant had fled the prison and his new address had been unknown.

On 12 September 2013 the same letter was sent by registered post to the applicant’s home address (provided in the application form). The letter was collected by the applicant’s sister on an unspecified date. An acknowledgment of receipt reached the Registry on 24 September 2013. The applicant did not reply and has not provided his new contact information.

THE LAW

The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue his application, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. Furthermore, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 in fine , the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the continued examination of the case.

In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list.

For these reasons, the Court unanimously

Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.

Fatoş Aracı George Nicolaou Deputy Registrar President