FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
PILOT-JUDGMENT PROCEDURE
Application no. 43661/04
by Janina RYKAŁA
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 19 November 2004,
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, Ms Janina Rykała, is a Polish national who was born in 1924 and lives in Westland, the United States of America.
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. 43661/04
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
On 29 October 1971 the Gliwice District Court (Sąd Powiatowy) gave a decision declaring that the applicant and her relatives had acquired her late father's estate and that they were entitled to receive one quarter each.
On 28 September 1988 the Kraków – Nowa Huta District Court (Sąd Rejonowy) gave a decision declaring that the applicant and her sisters had acquired her late mother's estate and that they were entitled to receive one third each.
On 17 September 1991 the applicant's sister acquired from the State compensatory property of an unspecified value.
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 inform the Court whether she 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