8.  The applicant was born in 1946 and lives in Grudziądz, Poland.
  1. Proceedings against a dentist and a health centre 9.  On 18 February 1994 the applicant filed with the Grudziądz District Court (sąd rejonowy) an action in which she claimed compensation from a dentist for alleged malpractice. Subsequently, she requested the court to stay the proceedings for half a year. 10.  On 5 October 1994 the court refused the applicant's request for exemption from the court costs. Her appeal against that decision was rejected as having been lodged outside the prescribed time-limit. 11.  The applicant submits that she did not attend the hearing held on 8 February 1995 because she had not been informed about it. 12.  On 1 March 1995 the applicant also sued the health centre at which the defendant worked. On the same day the court held a hearing. On 28 April 1995 it granted the applicant's subsequent request for exemption from the court costs. 13.  On 5 May 1995 the applicant requested the court to stay the proceedings for three months. 14.  On 16 May 1995 the court held a hearing. It refused the applicant's request to have the proceedings stayed. 15.  On 6 June 1995 the court gave judgment, in which it dismissed the applicant's action. She appealed. 16.  On 6 October 1995 the Toruń Regional Court (sąd wojewódzki) quashed a part of the first-instance judgment and remitted the case, in this part, for re-examination. It dismissed the remainder of the appeal. 17.  On 11 December 1995 the Grudziądz District Court held a hearing. On 19 January 1996 the case was transferred to the Regional Court, because the applicant had increased the amount of the compensation claimed. 18.  The Toruń Regional Court held hearings on 9 May 1996 and in October 1996. The hearing scheduled for 3 December 1996 was adjourned due to the absence of a witness and the defendant's representative. 19.  On 16 January 1997 the court held a further hearing, at which it ordered an expert opinion. On 13 June 1997 the experts returned the case file to the court, submitting that the applicant had refused to undergo a medical examination. On 18 June 1997 she requested the appointment of other experts. 20.  The court held hearings on 21 November 1997 and 10 February 1998. 21.  On 10 February 1998 it gave judgment, in which it dismissed the action. The applicant appealed. 22.  On 18 June 1998 the Gdańsk Court of Appeal (sąd apelacyjny) dismissed her appeal. She lodged a cassation appeal with the Supreme Court. 23.  On 26 July 2001 the Supreme Court dismissed that cassation appeal. 24.  On 27 April 1995 the applicant filed with the Grudziądz District Court an action in which she claimed compensation for alleged malpractice on the part of doctors who had performed a laser operation on her face. 25.  On 5 May 1995 the court transferred the case to the Toruń District Court. 26.  On 10 July 1995 the latter court refused the applicant's request for exemption from the court costs. On 9 August 1995 the Toruń Regional Court dismissed her appeal against that decision. 27.  On 7 September 1995 the District Court summoned the applicant to specify the defendant party. 28.  On 13 October 1995 the first hearing was held. Subsequently, the applicant increased the claimed amount. 29.  The court summoned her to specify her claim. It adjourned the hearing scheduled for 14 November 1995 due to the applicant's failure to comply with its order relating to her claim. 30.  On 20 November 1995 she increased the amount of the claimed compensation. 31.  On 23 November 1995 the court exempted the applicant from the court costs and transferred the case to the Toruń Regional Court, following the increase of the applicant's claims. 32.  On 7 March 1996 the court held a hearing. On 3 April 1996 it ordered the preparation of an expert opinion. The opinion was submitted to the court on 30 May 1996. 33.  On 27 June 1996 the applicant challenged that opinion. On 16 September 1996 she requested the court to appoint another expert. 34.  At the hearing held on 17 September the court requested the applicant to indicate other experts who could prepare the opinion. She provided the required information on 28 October 1996. On 6 December 1996 the court ordered another expert opinion, which was supposed to be prepared by 31 March 1997. In July 1997 the Warsaw Academy of Medicine, in charge of the preparation of that opinion, informed the court that due to the prolonged absence of an expert it was unable to set up a three-member commission to examine the case, the applicant having refused to be examined by only two members. In November 1997 the court summoned the Academy to expedite the work on the opinion, on pain of a fine. The opinion was submitted to the applicant in March 1998. On 17 April 1998 she challenged it. 35.  On 17 April 1998 the court held a hearing. 36.  On 24 April 1998 the Toruń Regional Court gave judgment, in which it dismissed the action. The applicant appealed. 37.  On 20 October 1998 the Gdańsk Court of Appeal dismissed her appeal. The applicant lodged a cassation appeal with the Supreme Court. On 24 November 1998 a legal-aid lawyer was appointed for her. On 11 January 1999 the Supreme Court summoned that lawyer to rectify procedural defects in that cassation appeal. 38.  On 31 August 2001 the Supreme Court refused to entertain the applicant's cassation appeal. It relied on a provision of the newly amended Code of Civil Procedure empowering it to leave without examination manifestly ill-founded appeals or appeals in cases where no serious legal issue arises.