FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
PILOT-JUDGMENT PROCEDURE
Application no. 33582/02
by Alojzy LACHOWICZ
against Poland
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 23 September 2008 as a Chamber composed of:
and 
Having regard to the above application lodged on 29 August 2002,
Having regard to the decision to apply the pilot-judgment procedure and to adjourn its consideration of applications deriving from the same systemic problem identified in the case of Broniowski v. Poland (no. 31443/96),
Having regard to the decisions to strike the applications Wolkenberg and Others v. Poland (no. 50003/99) and Witkowska-Toboła v. Poland (no. 11208/02) out of the Court's list of cases,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Alojzy Lachowicz, is a Polish national who was born in 1943 and lives in Bydgoszcz.
A.  Historical background to Bug River cases before the Court
(See E.G. v. Poland, no. 50425/99, §§ 2-5).
B.  Particular circumstances of case no. 33582/02
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
In December 1977 the applicant's father acquired State property in compensation for the property abandoned in the territories beyond the Bug River. The value of the compensatory property, according to the applicant's estimations, amounted to 70,000 Polish zlotys (PLN) as of October 2004, which corresponded to approximately 19 % of the original property.
On 29 September 1992 the Koszalin District Court (Sąd Rejonowy) gave a decision declaring that the applicant and his relatives had acquired his late father's estate and that they were entitled to receive one quarter each.
On 22 July 1998 the applicant obtained a certificate issued by the Head of the District Office (Urząd Rejonowy) confirming that the applicant and his brothers had the right to compensation for the property abandoned by their family, valued at PLN 175,085 as of April 1998.
The applicant's subsequent attempts to acquire State property were unsuccessful. The only possibility of enforcing the claim was to participate in competitive bids for the sale of State property. However, the State authorities throughout Poland officially acknowledged the acute shortage of State-owned land designated for the realisation of the Bug River claims.
This fact and the fact that at the material time it was the authorities' common practice to desist from organising auctions for Bug River claimants or to openly deny them the opportunity to enforce their entitlement through the statutory bidding procedure was established by the Court in the Broniowski judgment (see Broniowski, cited above, §§ 48-61, 69-87 and 168-176).
The applicant did not produce any document relating to the stage reached in the processing in the realisation of his claim. Nor did he not inform the Court whether he had initiated proceedings under the Law on the realisation of the right to compensation for property left beyond the present borders of the Polish State (Ustawa o realizacji prawa do rekompensaty z tytułu pozostawienia nieruchomości poza obecnymi granicami państwa polskiego) (“the July 2005 Act”) in order to obtain compensation for the Bug River property.
C.  Relevant domestic law and practice in respect of Bug River claims
(See E.G. v. Poland, no. 50425/99, §§ 16-17).
COMPLAINT
(See E.G. v. Poland, no. 50425/99, § 18).
THE LAW
(See E.G. v. Poland, no. 50425/99, §§ 19-29).
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
1.  Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases;
2.  Decides to close the pilot-judgment procedure applied in respect of the Bug River applications in the case of Broniowski v. Poland (no. 31443/96).
	Lawrence Early	Nicolas Bratza
	Registrar	President