CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 23 mai 2022

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .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 } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 13 June 2022   FIRST SECTION Application no. 54461/21 Agnieszka LUDWISIAK against Poland lodged on 26 October 2021 communicated on 23 May 2022 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicant was a victim party (auxiliary prosecutor, oskarżycielka posiłkowa ) in the criminal proceeding instituted against her former husband concerning domestic violence in which she sought compensation. On 19   August 2019 the Katowice District Court found the applicant’s former husband guilty and granted the applicant 10,000 Polish zlotys in compensation. On 17 July 2020 the Katowice Regional Court acquitted the defendant and dismissed the claim for compensation. The applicant and the public prosecutor lodged each a cassation appeal. On 23 April 2021 the Supreme Court dismissed both cassation appeals as manifestly ill-founded (case no. IV KK 490/20). It sat in a single ‑ judge formation composed of Judge A.B. who was appointed to that court by the President of Poland on 10   October 2018, pursuant to the recommendation of the National Council of the Judiciary ( Krajowa Rada Sądownictwa , “the NCJ”) as established under the Amending Act on the NCJ and certain other statutes of 8 December 2017 ( ustawa o zmianie ustawy o Krajowej Radzie Sądownictwa oraz niektórych innych ustaw ; “the 2017 Act”, resolution of 28   August 2018, no. 331/2018). The applicant complains that her civil claim was examined by a judicial formation of the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court, which included the judge appointed on the NCJ’s recommendation, in breach of her right to an “independent and impartial tribunal established by law”, as guaranteed by Article   6 § 1 of the Convention. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Was Article   6 §   1 of the Convention under its civil head applicable to the proceedings complained of? 2.     Was the formation of the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court which dealt with the case an “independent and impartial tribunal established by law” as required by Article   6 §   1 of the Convention? Reference is made to the Court’s judgments in Advance Pharma sp.   z   o.o v.   Poland , no. 1469/20, 3   February 2022 (not final), §§   294 ‑ 351, Dolińska ‑ Ficek and Ozimek v.   Poland , nos. 49868/19 and 57511/19, 8   November 2021, §§   283-359 and Guðmundur Andri Ástráðsson v.   Iceland [GC], no.   26374/18, 1   December 2020, §§   205-290.