2011年波兰国际私法的适用十年

IF 0.2 Q4 LAW
Paulina Twardoch, Agata Kozioł
{"title":"2011年波兰国际私法的适用十年","authors":"Paulina Twardoch, Agata Kozioł","doi":"10.54648/erpl2022029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article presents the Polish courts’ application of the national Private International Law Act 2011 (PIL 2011) during the 10 years it has been in force. The analysis of jurisprudence is supplemented with observations on recent developments in Polish doctrine.\nThe authors discuss correct and erroneous solutions adopted by courts, which are illustrated by provided examples of judgments regarding diverse legal issues. The article deals with mistakes consisting in ignoring the need to search for the applicable law. It also concerns, on the one hand, faulty perceptions and applications of newly introduced instruments (such as the so-called informative provisions or new conflict rules concerning issues that have not been regulated before in the conflictof- laws sphere) or of instruments shaped differently than in the past (such as renvoi). On the other hand, it considers problems that emerged in relation to mechanisms that are well known to Polish judges (such as the public policy exception). Challenges relating to delimiting PIL 2011 from other sources of PIL are also discussed.","PeriodicalId":43736,"journal":{"name":"European Review of Private Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"10 Years of Application of the Polish Act on Private International Law of 2011\",\"authors\":\"Paulina Twardoch, Agata Kozioł\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/erpl2022029\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article presents the Polish courts’ application of the national Private International Law Act 2011 (PIL 2011) during the 10 years it has been in force. The analysis of jurisprudence is supplemented with observations on recent developments in Polish doctrine.\\nThe authors discuss correct and erroneous solutions adopted by courts, which are illustrated by provided examples of judgments regarding diverse legal issues. The article deals with mistakes consisting in ignoring the need to search for the applicable law. It also concerns, on the one hand, faulty perceptions and applications of newly introduced instruments (such as the so-called informative provisions or new conflict rules concerning issues that have not been regulated before in the conflictof- laws sphere) or of instruments shaped differently than in the past (such as renvoi). On the other hand, it considers problems that emerged in relation to mechanisms that are well known to Polish judges (such as the public policy exception). Challenges relating to delimiting PIL 2011 from other sources of PIL are also discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43736,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Review of Private Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Review of Private Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/erpl2022029\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Review of Private Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/erpl2022029","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文介绍了波兰法院对2011年国家国际私法法案(PIL 2011)在其生效的10年间的适用情况。对法理学的分析补充了对波兰学说最新发展的观察。作者讨论了法院采用的正确和错误的解决办法,并通过提供的关于各种法律问题的判决实例加以说明。本文论述了忽视寻找适用法律的必要性所造成的错误。一方面,它还涉及对新引入的文书(例如所谓的信息性规定或关于法律冲突领域中以前未加以管制的问题的新的冲突规则)或与过去不同的文书(例如撤销)的错误认识和应用。另一方面,它审议了与波兰法官所熟知的机制有关的问题(例如公共政策例外)。还讨论了将PIL 2011与其他PIL来源区分开来的挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
10 Years of Application of the Polish Act on Private International Law of 2011
The article presents the Polish courts’ application of the national Private International Law Act 2011 (PIL 2011) during the 10 years it has been in force. The analysis of jurisprudence is supplemented with observations on recent developments in Polish doctrine. The authors discuss correct and erroneous solutions adopted by courts, which are illustrated by provided examples of judgments regarding diverse legal issues. The article deals with mistakes consisting in ignoring the need to search for the applicable law. It also concerns, on the one hand, faulty perceptions and applications of newly introduced instruments (such as the so-called informative provisions or new conflict rules concerning issues that have not been regulated before in the conflictof- laws sphere) or of instruments shaped differently than in the past (such as renvoi). On the other hand, it considers problems that emerged in relation to mechanisms that are well known to Polish judges (such as the public policy exception). Challenges relating to delimiting PIL 2011 from other sources of PIL are also discussed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
33.30%
发文量
25
×
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