litigation | In Principle

If injury is caused by a defective normative act, it may be unclear where to seek damages—from the State Treasury or from local government—particularly in cases where the actions of these defendants may not be regarded as unlawful.

Pursuing compensation from the State Treasury for loss caused by issuance of an unlawful judgment is predicated on obtaining a finding in an earlier proceeding that the judgment was unlawful. But the regulations governing how to obtain such a predicate ruling generate serious doubts.

Jak ocenić, czy postępowanie sądowe jest przewlekłe, i jak dochodzić odszkodowania, jeśli przewlekłość postępowania spowodowała szkodę.

The defectiveness (unlawfulness) of a tax decision isn’t enough. Injury must also be proved, and an ordinary causal link between issuance of the decision and the injury.

Under Art. 417 of the Civil Code, the State Treasury is liable for injury caused in exercise of public authority. It’s usually not too hard to determine whether the state is acting as a party to civil dealings and when it is exercising authoritative competencies. Nonetheless, there are some activities of public entities that are not clearly authoritative but should be deemed to be the exercise of public authority, the Supreme Court of Poland held in its judgment of 6 June 2014 (Case III CSK 211/13).

The Court of Justice of the European Union has ruled that a commercial agent may retain the right to a commission if the client intentionally refuses to perform the contract because the principal’s attitude has caused the client to lose confidence in the principal. The ruling also clarifies doubts surrounding the effect that partial non-performance of the contract has on the agent’s commission.

Making false representations about the state of tax liabilities of a company being sold may make it necessary to cover the buyer’s losses, even years after the transaction.

The “Creditors’ Package,” an overhaul of numerous acts, entered into force on 1 June 2017. Among other changes, it authorises public finance units to conclude settlements when certain conditions are fulfilled. This creates the hope for a more flexible attitude of public entities, open to dialogue with the private sector. But will this actually be achieved?

The European Court of Human Rights has held that an NGO operating an online blog cannot be held liable for comments posted by internet users because the organisation quickly deleted the offending posts. Meanwhile, the Warsaw Court of Appeal has held the publisher of a news site liable even though it was not notified of the unlawfulness of comments before being sued. These new rulings provide an occasion for sharing a few remarks about online defamation.

Mediation is becoming a more widely appreciated and applied alternative dispute resolution method. But there are categories of cases where it could be used more often. One of them is disputes between capital market participants, and in particular between brokerages and their clients.

Whether witnesses can be asked leading questions is a vital issue for fair trials, but is treated inconsistently in Polish litigation practice. Inspiration can be sought from the rules that have worked for years in common-law jurisdictions.

The English courts are among the most commonly selected in the world for resolving disputes. Most cases there are decided under English law, but membership in the EU is one reason for the popularity of English courts. After Brexit, does London have a chance to retain its position as a world leader in dispute resolution?