Key facts of the case:
The applicant A.B. wanted to cross the Polish border. The Polish Border Guard refused him an entry to Poland and informed him about the decision to revoke his Schengen visa. Together with this information, the applicant received information on the opportunity to appeal this decision and on the legal requirements for such an appeal. The information was prepared in another language (since the description of the judgement in anonymised, the information on the second language is not included). The applicant refused to confirm with his signature the receipt of the information concerning the deadline and the way to appeal the decision provided to him by the Border Guard. A couple of weeks later, after the deadline prescribed by law, the applicant submitted an appeal against this decision, however the Chief of the Polish Border Guard (the second instance in this case) dismissed it. This decision was justified by the fact that the application was submitted after the deadline. The applicant appealed against this decision to the Court.
Outcome of the case:
The Court decided that in this case a circumstance that could justify the delay in submitting the appeal did not occur. The Court dismissed the application.
In reference to the charge of violating Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, it has to be remembered that in paragraph 1 the Article guarantees the right to have one’s affairs handled impartially, fairly and within a reasonable time by the institutions and bodies of the Union. […] In the opinion of the Court, the applicant’s rights stemming from this Article have not been violated. Bearing in mind the factual and legal circumstances in which the organ issued a decision on the refusal of entry to Poland, it has to be concluded that the organ provided the applicant with a possibility of acquainting oneself with the content of the decision and the right to file an appeal against it and, as a consequence, provided him with a possibility of immediately taking appropriate legal steps.
Odnosząc się do zarzutu naruszenia art. 41 Karty Praw Podstawowych trzeba przypomnieć, że powołany przepis w ust. 1 stanowi, że każdy ma prawo do bezstronnego i sprawiedliwego rozponania swojej sprawy w rozsądnym terminie przez instytucje, organy i jednostki organizacyjne Unii […] Zdaniem Sądu prawa skarżącego wynikające z tego przepisu nie zostały naruszone. Mając na uwadze okoliczności faktyczne i prawne, w jakich organ wydał w stosunku do skarżącego decyzję odmawiającą wjazdu na terytorium Polski, należy uznać, że organ zapewnił skarżącemu możliwość zapoznania się z treścią decyzji oraz prawem do wniesienia środka odwoławczego i co za tym idzie zapewnił mu możliwość niezwłocznego podjęcia odpowiednich kroków prawnych.