Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  close persons
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

GLOSA do uchwały Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 22 czerwca 2017 r., III CZP 24/17

100%
Bieluk M.
Studia Iuridica Agraria
|
2017
|
vol. Studia Iuridica Agraria, 2017, tom XV
EN
Article 2b of the Act on Formation of the Agricultural System of 11 April 2003 is the source of a wide range of interpretation discrepancies and practical problems. In the commented on resolution, the Supreme Court settled the issue of the sale of agricultural property by the buyer before the end of the period provided for in art. 2b para. 1 of the Act to a close person within the meaning of art. 2 point 6 of the Act, indicating that it does not require the consent of the court issued on the basis of art. 2b para. 3 of this Act. The position of the Supreme Court deserves approval. The solutions introduced so far are sufficient in the prevention of speculative risk and the restrictive interpretation of this provision would be disproportionate to the intended purpose. The resolution of the above-mentioned issue by the Supreme Court should be positively assessed, however, the wording of art. 2b of the Act is still a source of many interpretative difficulties that need to be resolved. This applies, for example, to the insufficiently clear drafting of art. 2b para. 1, an unclear interpretation of art. 2b para. 3 and the narrowed circle of close persons in the definition contained in art. 2 para. 6.
2
Content available remote

Právnická osoba ako poškodený subjekt v trestnom konaní a jej súhlas poškodeného

75%
Mihálik S.
Právník. Teoretický časopis pro otázky státu a práva (The Lawyer - Scientific Review for Problems of State and Law)
|
2022
|
vol. 161
|
issue 3
260-274
EN
The author focuses on the question of whether a legal person as an injured party in criminal proceedings may have the consent of the injured party in accordance with Section 211 of the Criminal Procedure Code, or under what conditions and circumstances mentioned it comes into consideration. Although the search for a relevant answer to this issue is particularly important in cases where criminal proceedings are brought against a natural person, the author asks question whether the provision of the Criminal Procedure Code in question is also applicable in the case of criminal liability of legal persons, with emphasis on cases where the legal person would be in the position of the accused and injured person. The author pays attention to this elaboration not only with regard to recent starting points of the theory of criminal law, but primarily with regard to decision-making activities of general courts and the Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic. An interesting line of the issue is then a comparative view of the approaches to the established research question in the conditions of the Czech Republic.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Disqualification of en employee of a public administration authority in the European Union Member States

75%
Kmiecik Z.
Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny
|
2023
|
vol. 85
|
issue 2
109-126
EN
One of the rules contained in the Code of Good Administrative Behavior adopted in 2001 by the European Parliament is the principle of impartiality and independence (Article 8). The presence of this rule, despite its non-binding nature, prompted the author to examine – using the method of comparative law analysis – whether the EU Member States have regulated this issue in their legal systems – and if so, to what extent and how. The basic institution serving the implementation of this principle is the disqualification of an employee of the authority from participation in the proceedings in situations where their impartiality seems to be at risk. Not all EU countries explicitly provide for such an institution. Among the legal systems that contain it, only some regulate the entirety of issues related to it: the grounds for disqualification, the procedure for disqualification and the consequences of it, as well as the appealability of orders taken in this matter and the consequences of violating the provisions on disqualification. Regulations of individual issues differ in the degree of detail. This applies primarily to the reasons for the disqualification of an employee of the authority. The most important reason for the disqualification of employees (except when they or their spouse are a party to the proceedings) is the consanguinity or affinity between them and the party. However, the ranges of such ties resulting in automatic disqualification of an employee, adopted in EU member states, differ significantly. The second area of significant difference is the consequences of the potentially biased employee’s participation in the proceedings. The solutions adopted in this regard in legislation and jurisprudence depend on how the main purpose of the provisions concerning the disqualification of an employee is perceived: as strengthening the public’s trust in the executive, or as a fair settlement of the matter.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.