CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 19 février 2026

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sC36A6361 { font-family:Arial; color:#000000 } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sC986E16F { font-family:Arial; color:#ffffff } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .s71DADAB9 { width:127.41pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE3DA80B3 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#474747 } .sC39F4804 { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s4F2ADFDB { text-align:center; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .sBB6163A7 { width:2.48pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .sA4BC3E2E { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 }   FIRST SECTION DECISION Applications nos.   32023/23 and 41266/23 Edmund GIERCZAK against Poland and Lech JEWTUSZKO against Poland (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 19   February 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 regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the cases, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The list of applicants is set out in the appended table. The applicants were represented by Anna-Elżbieta Rakowska, a lawyer practising in Łódź. The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the alleged violation of the right to a hearing by an “independent and impartial tribunal established by law” and Article 1 of the Protocol No.   1, concerning the decrease of the applicants’ pensions, were communicated to the Polish Government (“the Government”). The Court received the friendly-settlement declarations, in so far as they concern the complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention regarding the composition of the Chamber of Labour and Social Insurance of the Supreme Court, signed by the parties, under which the applicants agreed to waive any further claims against Poland in respect of the facts giving rise to these applications, subject to an undertaking by the Government to pay them the amounts detailed in the appended table to cover any and all pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and, separately, costs and expenses, plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant. These amounts will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to pay these amounts within the above-mentioned three ‑ month period, the Government undertake to pay simple interest on them, from the expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The payment will constitute the final resolution of the cases. As regards the applicants’ complaints under Article   1 of Protocol No.   1 to the Convention, following the decisions issued 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. The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties as regards the complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the applications in that part. As regards the complaint under Article   1 of Protocol No.   1, the Court considers that the related issued have 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 . In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases 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 in accordance with Article   39 of the Convention. Done in English and notified in writing on 12 March 2026.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Raffaele Sabato   Acting Deputy Registrar   President   APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of the Protocol No.   1 (tribunal established by law and peaceful enjoyment of possessions) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth Representative’s name and location Date of receipt of Government’s declaration Date of receipt of Applicant’s declaration Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage per Applicant (in euros) [1] Amount awarded for costs and expenses per application (in euros) [2]     32023/23 08/08/2023 Edmund GIERCZAK 1940   Rakowska-Trela Anna Elżbieta Łódź 02/10/2025 12/09/2025 10,000 1,070     41266/23 06/11/2023 Lech JEWTUSZKO 1948   Rakowska-Trela Anna Elżbieta Łódź 02/10/2025 12/09/2025 10,000 1,070   [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants. [2] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.