Critical Commentary on the Judgment of the Court of Appeals in Bialystok of 27 October 2021 (III AUa 745/20) and Partially Critical to the Justification of the Judgment of the Supreme Court of 5 September 2023 (II USKP 94/22), Concerning the Problem of “Double” Liability of Members of the Management Board of Capital Companies for Dues for Contributions

Abstract

The commented judgments of the Court of Appeal in Bialystok and the Supreme Court, issued in the same case, refer to significant circumstances (premises) affecting the scope of subsidiary liability of a member of the management board of a capital company pursuant to Article 116 of the Tax Ordinance in conjunction with Articles 31 and 32 of the Act on the Social Insurance System for the company’s arrears due to unpaid contributions, together with default interest and enforcement costs. The judgments in question deserve attention because the case raised important legal issue related to the problem of “double” liability of management board members, which is of great importance for legal practice and jurisprudence in similar cases. In addition to critical comments on the voted judgments, the author presents a proposal for solving the legal issue, answering two questions included in the cassation complaint, formulating the essence of the analyzed problem.