5.  The applicant was born in 1939 and lives in Miechucino, Poland. 6.  In 1992 the applicant donated his agricultural property to his son. In 1996 the public notary prepared an amendment to the contract concerning the transfer of certain items of property (agricultural equipment) to the applicant's son. On 24 June 1997 the Gdańsk Court of Appeal (Sąd Apelacyjny) confirmed that the amendment was invalid. 7.  On 5 July 2001 the applicant sued his son, J.P., before the Gdańsk Regional Court (Sąd Okręgowy) for restitution of the items of property in question. The applicant indicated that the value of the claim was almost 200,000 Polish zlotys (PLN). He also asked to be exempted from court fees. 8.  On 18 September 2001 the Regional Court refused to exempt the applicant from court fees. The court gave the following reasons for its decision:
“The applicant submitted that his only income was a disability pension in the amount of PLN 552.21 [approx. EUR 138]. He further claimed that he did not own any real estate or any other assets, except for a car. However, he had been paying for it in instalments: PLN 159.50 [approx. EUR 40] monthly. The plaintiff estimated the amount of his monthly expenses for his flat at PLN 200 [EUR 50].
From the documents submitted by the applicant it appears that the sum he spends monthly on his flat, and the loan for the car customised for a disabled person, amounts to PLN 359.5. After he pays for the flat and the loan, the plaintiff has PLN 192.5 left [approx. EUR 48]. According to the court, it is not enough to cover his maintenance costs such as food, clothes and medication...
This leads the court to the conclusion that the plaintiff has other additional resources and he can afford to pay the court fees in question. Consequently, considering that the plaintiff failed to indicate all his assets, the court dismisses his application for an exemption from court fees.” 9.  On 30 October 2001 the applicant filed an interlocutory appeal against this decision. He also filed a new motion for an exemption from court fees. 10.  The Gdańsk Regional Court rejected the applicant's interlocutory appeal as it had been lodged outside the prescribed time-limit. On 19 April 2002 the Gdańsk Court of Appeal upheld this decision. 11.  On 21 May 2002 the Regional Court ordered the applicant to supplement his motion for an exemption from court fees. 12.  In reply the applicant stressed that his financial situation had not changed and was still very bad. His disability benefit had increased by PLN 2, as shown by a pay slip he had attached. 13.  On 17 June 2002 the Gdańsk Regional Court rejected the applicant's second motion for exemption from court fees. The court held that it had already considered the applicant's financial situation and found that it had not justified an exemption. 14.  The applicant filed an interlocutory appeal. He submitted that he was 63 years old and in poor health. He was not even able to buy the necessary medication as his monthly disability pension amounted to PLN 556. For these reasons he believed that he should be exempted from court fees. 15.  On 16 October 2002 the Gdansk Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant's interlocutory appeal against this decision. The court repeated the reasons given by the Regional Court. 16.  On 12 November 2002 the Regional Court ordered the applicant to pay PLN 11,305.5 [approx. EUR 2,826] for lodging his statement of claim on pain of having it returned. 17.  As the applicant failed to do so, his statement of claim was returned to him on 3 February 2003.