Key facts of the case:
The Supreme Administrative Court dismissed the appeal against the rejection, on 11 March 2013, by the Regional Administrative Courtin Warsaw of P.S.’s cassation appeal against the judgement of 10 January 2013 passed by the Regional Administrative Court. In its judgement of 10 January 2013 the court decided on the complaint lodged by P.S. on the inaction of the Minister of Economy which concerned the recognition of an application for a certificate of residence address. The Regional Administrative Court in Warsaw pointed out that the cassation complaint brought by P.S. did not contain the applicant’s personal signature, but only contained the electronic signature. By letter dated 8 February 2013, the complainant was asked to rectify formal shortcomings of the cassation complaint by signing it within 7 days from the date of service of summons under pain of rejection of the cassation complaint. This call was served on the applicant on 12 February 2013, and the deadline to comply with the Court's requests expired on 19 February 2013. The applicant did not rectify the formal shortcomings of the cassation complaint because he considered that he was authorized to use the electronic signature.In other words, in the present case, the issue is whether a procedural document lodged with the court with an electronic signature meets the formal requirements for procedural document in administrative court proceedings.
In the opinion of the Supreme Administrative Court, the lack of procedural regulation for lodgingpleadings signed with an electronic signature in administrative court proceedings does not affect the right to a court under Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, as neither this provision nor the Court of Justice of the European Union provide such procedural requirements. In this regard, the adoption of appropriate procedural rules to allow enjoyment of the right to a court is therefore left to the Member States, in accordance with the principle of "procedural autonomy".