Hide
Show all
Email this article Binding of Polish Courts by Interpretative Judgments in National and European Context
Abstract
The study is of a scientific and research nature, devoted to the most characteristic type of operative interpretation related to judicial interpretation. The subject of the research, carried out using the method of dogmatic analysis of law, is the verification of two problems: the binding of the court of first instance to the legal assessments made by the appellate court and the extent to which Polish courts are bound by the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the interpretation and application of EU regulations. The authors draw attention to the necessity of analyzing the interpretation of regulations, made in the justifications of court decisions. This is very interesting in the context of judicial independence and the great freedom of judges to interpret laws and phenomena. However, it also raises a number of doubts about the extent of the relationship with such freely interpreted content. The scope of the research and the results obtained are international in nature and can be of significant cognitive value to the science and practice of law application.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
LITERATURE
Anderson D., References to the European Court, London 1995.
Arnull A., The European Union and Its Court of Justice, Oxford 1999.
Broberg M., Fenger N., Broberg and Fenger on Preliminary References to the European Court of Justice, Oxford 2021, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198843580.001.0001.
Dąbrowska P., Skutki orzeczenia wstępnego Europejskiego Trybunału Sprawiedliwości, Warszawa 2004.
Dąbrowska-Kłosińska P., Skutki wyroków prejudycjalnych TS w postępowaniu przed sądami krajowymi w świetle orzecznictwa i Traktatu z Lizbony, “Europejski Przegląd Sądowy” 2010, no. 12.
Dąbrowski S., Łazarska A., Uzasadnienie orzeczeń sądowych w prawie cywilnym, “Przegląd Sądowy” 2012, no. 3.
Dziurda M., Wyrok w procesie częściowym a prawomocność materialna, “Monitor Prawniczy” 2018, no. 23.
Flaga-Gieruszyńska K., Klich A., Nowy model uzasadnienia wyroku w procesie cywilnym, “Prawo Mediów Elektronicznych” 2015, no. 1.
Grzegorczyk P., Przedmiotowy zakres prawomocności materialnej wyroku w procesie częściowym, [in:] Aurea Praxis Aurea Thoeria. Księga pamiątkowa ku czci Profesora Tadeusza Erecińskiego, eds. J. Gudowski, K. Weitz, vol. 1, Warszawa 2011.
Gudowski J., Normatywny, jurysdykcyjny i kulturowy kryzys uzasadnienia wyroku. Droga znikąd donikąd, “Polski Proces Cywilny” 2020, no. 3.
Jakubecki A. (ed.), Kodeks postępowania cywilnego. Komentarz do wybranych przepisów nowelizacji 2019, LEX/el. 2019.
Lenaerts K., Federalism and the Rule of Law: Perspectives from the European Court of Justice, “Fordham International Law Review” 2011, vol. 33(5).
Maliszewska-Nienartowicz J., Prawo dziecka do kontaktów z osobami bliskimi w sytuacjach transgranicznych – uwagi na tle unijnych regulacji prawnych oraz orzecznictwa TSUE, “Białostockie Studia Prawnicze” 2022, vol. 27(3).
Manowska M. (ed.), Kodeks postępowania cywilnego. Komentarz, vol. 1, LEX/el. 2020.
Paziewska B., Problematyka ochrony zdrowia publicznego na tle regulacji prawa Unii Europejskiej i orzecznictwa TSUE dotyczących nowej żywności, “Studia Iuridica Agraria” 2018, vol. 16, DOI: https://doi.org/10.15290/sia.2018.16.10.
Półtorak N., Ratione Temporis Application of the Preliminary Ruling Procedure, “Common Market Law Review” 2008, vol. 45(5), DOI: https://doi.org/10.54648/COLA2008094.
Schermers H.G., Waelbroeck D.F., Judicial Protection in the European Union, Kluwer Law International 2001.
Svobodová M., Šmejkal V., ECJ ́s New Role – Guardian of Open but not Socially Inclusive Europe?, “Eastern European Journal of Transnational Relations” 2018, vol. 2(2), DOI: https://doi.org/10.15290/eejtr.2018.02.02.01.
Wiśniewski T., Przebieg procesu cywilnego, Warszawa 2009.
Wróbel A. (ed.), Stosowanie prawa Unii Europejskiej przez sądy, Kraków 2005.
LEGAL ACTS
Act of 17 November 1964 – Civil Procedure Code (consolidated text, Journal of Laws 2021, item 1805, as amended).
Act of 30 August 2002 – Law on proceedings before administrative courts (consolidated text, Journal of Laws 2019, item 2325, as amended).
Constitution of the Republic of Poland of 2 April 1997 (Journal of Laws 1997, no. 78, item 483, as amended).
Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community, Paris, European Coal and Steel Community, 1951.
Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) and connected documents, Brussels, Secretariat of the Interim Committee for the Common Market and Euratom, 1957.
Treaty establishing the European Economic Community and connected documents, Brussels, Secretariat of the Interim Committee for the Common Market and Euratom, 1957.
Treaty on European Union, together with the complete text of the Treaty establishing the European Community (OJ C 224/1, 31.8.1992).
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated version, OJ C 202/47, 7.6.2016).
CASE LAW
Court of Justice of the European Union
Judgment of the Court of 6 April 1962 in case 13/61, Bosch, ECLI:EU:C:1962:11.
Judgment of the Court of 12 May 1964 in case 101/63, Albert Wagner v Jean Fohrmann and Antoine Krier, ECLI:EU:C:1964:28.
Judgment of the Court of 3 February 1977 in case 52-76, Luigi Benedetti, ECLI:EU:C:1977:16.
Judgment of the Court of 13 May 1981 in case 66/80, SpA International Chemical Corporation v Amministrazione delle finanze dello Stato, ECLI:EU:C:1981:102.
Judgment of the Court of 17 October 1990 in case C-10/89, SA CNL-SUCAL NV v HAG GF AG, ECLI:EU:C:1990:359.
Judgment of the Court of 8 November 1990 in case C-231/89, Krystyna Gmurzynska-Bscher v Oberfinanzdirektion Köln, ECLI:EU:C:1990:386.
Judgment of the Court of 21 February 1991 in joined cases C-143/88 and C-92/89, Zuckerfabrik Süderdithmarschen AG v Hauptzollamt Itzehoe and Zuckerfabrik Soest GmbH v Hauptzollamt Paderborn, ECLI:EU:C:1991:65.
Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 29 May 1997 in case C-26/96, Rotexchemie International Handels GmbH & Co. v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Waltershof, ECLI:EU:C:1997:261.
Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 14 December 2000 in case C-446/98, Fazenda Pública, ECLI:EU:C:2000:691.
Judgment of the Court of 30 September 2003 in case C-224/01, Köbler, ECLI:EU:C:2003:513.
Judgment of the Court of 13 January 2004 in case C-453/00, Kühne & Heitz, ECLI:EU:C:2004:17.
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 16 March 2006, in case C-234/04, Kapferer, ECLI:EU:C:2006:178.
Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 18 July 2007 in case C-119/05, Lucchini, ECLI:EU:C:2007:434.
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 11 December 2008 in joined cases C-362/07 and C-363/07, Kip Europe, ECLI:EU:C:2008:710.
Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 16 December 2008 in case C-127/07, Arcelor Atlantique and Lorraine, ECLI:EU:C:2008:728.
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 20 November 2008 in case C-375/07, Heuschen & Schrouff Oriental Foods Trading, ECLI:EU:C:2008:645.
Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 5 October 2010 in case C-173/09, Elchinov, ECLI:EU:C:2010:581.
Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 21 July 2011 in case C-14/10, Nickel Institute, ECLI:EU:C:2011:503.
Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 16 June 2015 in case C-62/14, Gauweiler and Others, ECLI:EU:C:2015:400.
Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 5 April 2016 in case C-689/13, PFE, ECLI:EU:C:2016:199.
Opinion of Mr Advocate General Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer delivered on 14 May 1998 in joined cases C-10/97 to C-22/97, Ministero delle Finanze against IN.CO.GE.’90 Srl, Idelgard Srl, Iris’90 Srl, Camed Srl, Pomezia Progetti Appalti Srl (PPA), Edilcam Srl, A. Cecchini & C. Srl, EMO Srl, Emoda Srl, Sappesi Srl, Ing. Luigi Martini Srl, Giacomo Srl i Mafar Srl, ECLI:EU:C:1998:228.
Order of the Court of 5 March 1986 in case 69/85, Wünsche, ECLI:EU:C:1986:104.
Polish Supreme Court
Decision of the Supreme Court of 3 June 2009, IV CSK 511/08, Legalis.
Decision of the Supreme Court 7 May 2019, VCZ 7/19, Legalis.
Judgment of the Supreme Court of 13 January 2000, II CKN 655/98.
Judgment of the Supreme Court of 23 May 2002, IV CKN 1073/00.
Judgment of the Supreme Court of 21 June 2007, IV CSK 63/07, Legalis.
Judgment of the Supreme Court of 15 November 2007, II CSK 347/07, Legalis.
Judgment of the Supreme Court of 13 January 2011, III CSK 94/10, Legalis.
Judgment of the Supreme Court of 7 April 2011, I PK 225/10.
Judgment of the Supreme Court of 29 September 2011, IV CSK 652/10, Legalis.
Judgment of the Supreme Court of 3 October 2012, II CSK 312/12, Legalis.
Judgment of the Supreme Court of 24 October 2013, IV CSK 62/13, Legalis.
Resolution of the Supreme Court of 8 November 2019, III CZP 27/19, OSNC 2020, no. 6, item 48.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17951/sil.2024.33.3.43-59
Date of publication: 2024-09-27 21:28:02
Date of submission: 2023-08-28 15:28:53
Statistics
Indicators
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2024 Agnieszka Malarewicz-Jakubów, Anna Doliwa-Klepacka
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.