Mieszkowska-Dutka and Bigaj v. Poland

FIRST SECTION

Application nos. 32989/23 and 41620/23 Kazimiera MIESZKOWSKA-DUTKA against Poland and Adam BIGAJ against Poland (see appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 2 July 2026 as a Committee composed of:

Raffaele Sabato , President , Artūrs Kučs, Anna Adamska-Gallant , judges

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above applications 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”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The list of applicants and their representatives is set out in the appended table.

The applicants’ complaints under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, concerning the decrease of the applicants’ pensions, were communicated to the Polish Government (“the Government”).

Following the decisions issued in 2025 by the Minister of the Interior and Administration and the subsequent recalculations, the applicants had been receiving their pension at the same rate as before these were reduced in 2017, and they had also received full back payments. The Court therefore finds that the circumstances complained of by the applicants no longer obtain and the effects of a possible violation of the Convention on account of those circumstances have been redressed, and therefore both conditions for the application of Article 37 § 1 (b) of the Convention are met (see El Majjaoui and Stichting Touba Moskee v. the Netherlands (striking out) [GC], no. 25525/03, §§ 30-34, 20 December 2007, and Vadalà v. Italy (dec.), no. 14656/15, § 35, 7 November 2023).

THE LAW

Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision.

In view of the above, the Court considers that the matter has been resolved within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (b) of the Convention.

The Court also reiterates that it is not required, for the purposes of Article 37 § 1 (b) of the Convention, that the national authorities acknowledge a violation of the Convention or that the applicant, in addition to having obtained a resolution of the matter, is also granted compensation (see H.P. v. Denmark (dec.), no. 55607/09 , § 78, 13 December 2016, and Klucińska ‑ Głuszczak v. Poland (dec.) no. 33274/22, § 35, 14 October 2025).

Lastly, the Court finds no particular reason relating to respect for human rights as defined in the Convention that would require it to continue to examine the complaints at issue under Article 37 § 1 in fine .

Accordingly, the applications should be struck out of the list.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Decides to join the applications;

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

Done in English and notified in writing on 27 August 2026.

Viktoriya Maradudina Raffaele Sabato Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX

List of applications raising complaints under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of the Convention

(peaceful enjoyment of possessions)

No.

Application no.

Date of introduction

Applicant’s name

Year of birth

Representative’s name and location

32989/23

18/08/2023

Kazimiera MIESZKOWSKA-DUTKA

1948

41620/23

21/11/2023

Adam BIGAJ

1949

Andrzej Bigaj

Kraków