GLOSA DO PUNKTU 2 LIT. B WYROKU TRYBUNAŁU KONSTYTUCYJNEGO Z DNIA 7 PAŹDZIERNIKA 2021 R., K 3/21

Q3 Social Sciences
M. Dąbrowski
{"title":"GLOSA DO PUNKTU 2 LIT. B WYROKU TRYBUNAŁU KONSTYTUCYJNEGO Z DNIA 7 PAŹDZIERNIKA 2021 R., K 3/21","authors":"M. Dąbrowski","doi":"10.31338/2544-3135.si.2022-95.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The author offers a critical commentary on the point 2b of the Constitutional Tribunal judgment of 7 October 2021, K 3/21. The Tribunal claims that issuing court verdicts on the basis of the provisions which are not binding, having been revoked by the Sejm and/or ruled by the Constitutional Tribunal, is inconsistent with Art. 2, 7, 8(1), 90(1), and 178(1) of the Constitution. The Constitutional Court reconstructs the mentioned above jurisdiction of the courts based on the Art. 19(1), second subparagraph, of the Treaty on European Union. The author doesn’t agree with this statement and argues that the Tribunal incorrectly and unlawfully interprets the provisions of the Treaty. Furthermore, the verdict is in contrary to Art. 2 and 42 of the Polish Constitution and the principle of non retroactivity of law. Moreover, the Tribunal’s decision violates the concept of the Constitutional Tribunal judicature with the deferred clause. The author claims that the Tribunal’s decision does not cause any legal effects and the courts in Poland will not apply it during resolving cases.","PeriodicalId":36157,"journal":{"name":"Studia Iuridica Lublinensia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studia Iuridica Lublinensia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31338/2544-3135.si.2022-95.6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The author offers a critical commentary on the point 2b of the Constitutional Tribunal judgment of 7 October 2021, K 3/21. The Tribunal claims that issuing court verdicts on the basis of the provisions which are not binding, having been revoked by the Sejm and/or ruled by the Constitutional Tribunal, is inconsistent with Art. 2, 7, 8(1), 90(1), and 178(1) of the Constitution. The Constitutional Court reconstructs the mentioned above jurisdiction of the courts based on the Art. 19(1), second subparagraph, of the Treaty on European Union. The author doesn’t agree with this statement and argues that the Tribunal incorrectly and unlawfully interprets the provisions of the Treaty. Furthermore, the verdict is in contrary to Art. 2 and 42 of the Polish Constitution and the principle of non retroactivity of law. Moreover, the Tribunal’s decision violates the concept of the Constitutional Tribunal judicature with the deferred clause. The author claims that the Tribunal’s decision does not cause any legal effects and the courts in Poland will not apply it during resolving cases.
提交人对宪法法庭2021年10月7日K 3/21号判决的第2b点提出了批评性评论。法庭声称,根据已被瑟姆撤销和(或)由宪法法庭裁决的不具约束力的条款作出法院判决,不符合《宪法》第2、7、8(1)、90(1)和178(1)条。宪法法院根据《欧洲联盟条约》第19(1)条第二款重建上述法院的管辖权。发件人不同意这种说法,并认为法庭错误和非法地解释了《条约》的规定。此外,该判决违反了《波兰宪法》第2条和第42条以及法律不溯及既往的原则。此外,法庭的决定违反了宪法法庭司法的概念,其中有推迟的条款。提交人声称,法庭的裁决不产生任何法律效力,波兰法院在解决案件时不会适用该裁决。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Studia Iuridica Lublinensia
Studia Iuridica Lublinensia Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
47
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信