CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 3 février 2016

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA8776625 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt }     Communicated on 3 February 2016   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 65860/12 Ewa WESOŁEK against Poland lodged on 26 September 2012 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicant, Ms Ewa Wesołek, is a Polish national, who was born in 1965 and lives in Piaski. She is represented before the Court by Mr   K.   Nawrocki, a lawyer practising in Leszno. A.     The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. On 2 May 2011 the Koszalin Regional Court issued a payment order ( nakaz zapłaty ) against the applicant. It stipulated that she was to pay to the claimant, a certain D.K., the sum of 156,000 Polish zlotys (PLN), equivalent to 36,000 euros (EUR). The applicant lodged an appeal ( sprzeciw ) within the time-limit. She complained that the payment order had been based on a lease contract which had turned null and void but which she had secured by a blank bill of exchange signed by her. She challenged such basis and considered them illegal and unfounded. She further applied for exemption from the court fees. On 13 July 2011 the court officer of the Koszalin Regional Court ( referendarz sądowy ) decided to partly exempt her from the fees. The court noted her difficult financial situation, debts and the fact that she had not initiated the current proceedings. Nevertheless the court considered that the applicant should be expected to pay 1/3 of the fees due to appeal against the payment order. The applicant appealed against the decision of the court officer. She submitted that her business generated losses and she had been financially dependent of her family. The applicant underlined that she had not instituted the civil proceedings thus she could not prepare for their costs or limit the claimed sum. On 3 August 2011 the Koszalin Regional Court upheld the decision of the court officer. The applicant was ordered to pay PLN 1,928 (EUR 500) within seven days. On 26 October 2011 the Koszalin Regional Court rejected the applicant’s appeal against the payment order of 2 May 2011 and rejected her second application for full exemption from the court fees. On 30 March 2012 the Szczecin Court of Appeal rejected her appeal against the latter decision for failure to pay a further fee of PLN 1000. The decision was delivered to the applicant on 10 April 2012. B.     Relevant domestic law and practice The legal provisions applicable at the material time and questions of practice are set out in the judgment of Mogielnicki v. Poland , no.   42689/09, § 20-27, 15 September 2015. COMPLAINT The applicant complains under Article   6 §   1 of the Convention that court fees imposed on her for appealing against the payment order deprived her of her right of access to a court.     QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Given the amount of court fees required from the applicant to appeal against the payment order of 2 May 2011 and the decision of 26 October 2011, was her right of “access to a court”, as   secured by Article   6 §   1, respected?