{"title":"Legal Institutions Regulating the Subject and Rules of Liability of Debtor’s Heirs: Comments on the Background of Polish and German Law Solutions","authors":"Katarzyna Gawełko-Bazan","doi":"10.5604/01.3001.0015.9982","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0015.9982","url":null,"abstract":"The article attempts to answer the question whether legal regulations regulating the aspect of the of succession law referred to in the title, i.e., the subject and principles of liability of the debtor’s heirs and the closely connected rights of the creditors, introduced by the Act of 20 March 2015 Amending the Act – the Civil Code and Certain Other Acts (official journal ‘Dz.U.’ of 2015, item 539), are sufficient. The considerations aimed at formulating conclusions were conducted on the basis of research methods appropriate to civil law. First of all, a formal-dogmatic method has been applied in order to present the current legal solutions and allowing, at a further stage of the considerations, to verify the research thesis and the underlying research hypotheses. In order to assess the degree of dissimilarity of solutions adopted in the Polish law, pertaining to the examined issue, with the solutions applied in other countries, the method of legal-comparative analysis was applied. For this purpose, the system of German law was chosen as, alike in the Polish law, in this legal system unlimited liability for inheritance debts is the rule. Some of the considerations were also based on the historical-comparative method and concerned mainly the discussion of other legal institutions known to the succession law relating to the scope and subject of the liability of the debtor’s heirs. These remarks referred primarily to regulations in force prior to the entry of the Polish Civil Code and the Code of Civil Procedure into force. The final part of the article presents conclusions and de lege ferenda postulates.\u0000\u0000","PeriodicalId":403517,"journal":{"name":"Kwartalnik Prawa Międzynarodowego","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125975001","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Excessive Length of Pretrial Detention in the Light of Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights","authors":"Urszula Szafrańska","doi":"10.5604/01.3001.0015.9891","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0015.9891","url":null,"abstract":"The article is devoted to the problem of applying pre-trial detention by Polish courts since Poland has become a member state of the Council of Europe. The author aims to present the standards of the European Court of Human Right’s jurisprudence in this respect, and at the same time to highlight the most frequent mistakes in the jurisprudence of national courts, which result in finding of a violation of Article 5(3) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The author’s intention is to show, using a historical method, that the institution of pre-trial detention was abused by Polish courts in previous years, however, it has improved now due to, among other things, the influence of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights on the process of establishing and applying the law in Poland in the field of pre-trial detention over the past 29 years.\u0000\u0000","PeriodicalId":403517,"journal":{"name":"Kwartalnik Prawa Międzynarodowego","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125240147","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Freedom of Establishment of Pharmacies in the Case Law of the Court of Justice of the European Union","authors":"Anna Sporczyk-Popielarczyk","doi":"10.5604/01.3001.0015.9882","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0015.9882","url":null,"abstract":"The objective of the European Union’s healthcare policy is to protect and improve the health of people at a European level. At the same time, actions taken by European bodies are merely complementary to national health policies. This means that the concepts of national health systems, including access to the pharmacy business, lie within the scope of powers of individual member states. Legal regulations governing the operation of pharmacies are not harmonised and, hence, national systems are not homogeneous. Currently, national pharmacy business models vary from one EU member state to another, depending on adopted legal solutions as well as political and economic context in which pharmacies operate. The problem which thus arises is whether the legal regulations that impose certain restrictions on the pharmacy business can be deemed violating the freedom of establishment in the European Union. An analysis of the Court of Justice’s jurisprudence leads to a position that the EU law does not stand in the way of national regulations that make the right to operate a pharmacy conditional on the possession of pharmaceutical education, if certain conditions are met. In the light of the Court’s line of jurisprudence, restrictions on the freedom of establishment should be applied without discrimination on grounds of nationality, and should be justified by overriding reasons of general interest, should be suitable to achieve legitimate objectives and should not go beyond what is necessary for the achievement of these objectives. Furthermore, the protection of public health and the duty to provide the population with a steady supply of medical products of proper quality seem to outweigh the freedom to conduct business under the treaties\u0000\u0000","PeriodicalId":403517,"journal":{"name":"Kwartalnik Prawa Międzynarodowego","volume":"70 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116659659","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Common Language - One Law: Prospective Legal Unification Processes Based on a Practical Use of the e-Justice Portal","authors":"Marta B. Rękawek-Pachwicewicz","doi":"10.5604/01.3001.0015.9881","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0015.9881","url":null,"abstract":"In search of interesting legal solutions connected with modern and effective functioning of the judiciary, the author draws attention to the use of the most technologically advanced solutions in the sphere of justice in countries of the European Union. The aim is, among others, to improve the functioning of the justice system. The paper briefly describes big data tools and projects based on them, such as e-CODEX or e-Justice Portal. In the further part of the article, reference is made to the trend of creating tools of linguistic and semantic nature, used not only by lawyers, but also by citizens as well. An example thereof is the IMOLA project implemented by the European Land Registry Association in Brussels covering national land registers, with the ambitious intention of launching an operational system that will eventually integrate national databases. The study concludes with Ludwik Zamenhof’s dream: ‘Let Us Work and Have Hope!’ (Ni laboru kaj esperu!), referring to the role of the universal language he has created as a bridge to world peace and well-being of all people. The idea is that a common language brings people together. This role could be taken over by English and the technological advances of the digital world, which bring European countries closer to his yearning for peace, albeit in a slightly different way than he imagined. Improving the quality of communication is the key to success, which builds trust in the state.\u0000\u0000","PeriodicalId":403517,"journal":{"name":"Kwartalnik Prawa Międzynarodowego","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131159283","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Commentary on the Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 20 June 2022, Case C-273/18, London P&I Club","authors":"K. Szafranski","doi":"10.5604/01.3001.0015.9984","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0015.9984","url":null,"abstract":"The London P&I Club judgment was expected to settle down certain issues regarding the relationship between arbitration and the Brussels I Regulation by deciding whether a judgement made under a United Kingdom law in terms of an arbitral award may be recognized as a judgment within the meaning of Article 34 of the Brussels I Regulation to the extent this provision permits refusal of recognition on the grounds of irreconcilability with a judgement of a Member State addressed. Despite giving an affirmative answer to the above question, the Court of Justice of the European Union has introduced completely new guidelines and limitations on the use of the irreconcilability grounds for refusal of recognition in order to prevent parties from abusing arbitration in order to circumvent binding provisions of the Brussels I Regulation. The commentary explores the grounds and historical context of the London P&I Club judgment, aiming to uncover the CJEU’s train of thought beyond what has been written in the court opinion, as well as attempting to provide a broader perspective on its consequences, beyond English judgments in terms of an arbitral award.\u0000\u0000","PeriodicalId":403517,"journal":{"name":"Kwartalnik Prawa Międzynarodowego","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122190062","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}