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

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  enforcement procedure
help Sort By:

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

Projekt stanowiska Sejmu w sprawie o sygn. akt P 3/141

100%
Herbet A.
Zeszyty Prawnicze BAS
|
2015
|
issue 2(46)
215-233
EN
In the proposed draft position the author points to the incompatibility with the Constitution of Article 51 para. 1 subpara. 3 of the Act on Court Bailiffs and Enforcement insofar as it does not provide for a separate fixed fee rates for emptying the dwelling of the things or people in a situation in which the debtor, after being given notice by a bailiff, has voluntarily performed the obligation within the prescribed time period. The author points out that the definitive reason for finding the unconstitutionality of the provision in question is an internal inconsistency of the mechanism for determining the amount of an enforcement fee, the results of which are contrary to the basic principles of law and the structure of such proceedings as provided for in the Code of Penal Procedure, and at the same time violates the rights of the debtor, discouraging him, in fact, from voluntary performance of the obligation. In the author’s view, proceedings should be discontinued in relation to Article 51 para. 2 of the Act on Court Bailiffs and Enforcement, the remaining scope of the question of law should be left unexamined.
2

Ograniczenia rozporządzania nieruchomością rolną nabytą na licytacji sądowej

51%
Dzienis P.
Rejent
|
2021
|
issue 1 (357)
35-52
EN
Restrictions on agricultural real estate are the subject of many statements as they affect the ownership triad. This time the subject of consideration is the intertemporal issue in the context of understanding the rule of intermittent law tempus regit actum. The commented resolution of the Supreme Court of September 7, 2018, III CZP 32/18 shows the enforcement aspect of agricultural legal issues. The author seeks to answer the question about the correct interpretation of the legislator’s silence. He asks basic questions about who the “buyer” is and what is “proceeding to acquire property”. The interpretation of these statutory phrases plays an important role in this study. Since the result of the linguistic interpretation is unsatisfactory, and yet the loopholes in the law are only apparent, a purposeful, systemic and authentic interpretation is used. The author conducts an in-depth analysis of the issue against the background of the real estate execution model. The conclusions derived from the analysis allow for the approval of commented resolution and recognition that the silence of the legislator is quite apparent. In addition to the evaluation, the impact of this decision on practice is shown.
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.