Results found: 2

Search results

Search:
in the keywords: procedural safeguards

Sort By:

Limit search:

Refusal to adjourn a hearing due to the defender’s being ill vs. execution of the right of defence - comments on Article 378a § 1 of the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure

100%

Ignasiak M.

Acta Iuris Stetinensis

2020

vol. 30

issue 2

21-33

The object of this paper constitutes the issue regarding the principle of the right of defence in Polish criminal proceedings in the context of the new regulation included in Article 378a par. 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which came into effect on 5 October 2019 (as a result of the entry into force of the Act of 19 July 2019 amending the Act on the Code of Criminal Procedure and certain other acts, Dz.U. (Journal of Laws) of 2019 item 1694). To be precise, the court’s refusal to take into consideration the defender’s motion for adjournment of the term of a hearing due to his or her illness confirmed with a sick leave issued by a pathologist. The aim of this study was to draw attention to the questionable character of the afore- mentioned Article in terms of the procedural safeguards of the accused. The paper presents the circumstances, as well as the state of proceedings, indicating the evidence of violation of the principle of the right of defence in criminal proceedings by improper application of Arti¬cle 378a par. 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. A formal-dogmatic method has been used. Furthermore, the author’s intention was to present the irrationality of the Polish legisla¬tor introducing solutions contrary to the model of criminal procedure, including, in particu- lar, violation of the constitutionally guaranteed rights of the accused.

Competence of Common Courts in Poland in Competition Matters

63%

Stawicki A.

Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies

2012

vol. 5(6)

57-71

The main aim of this article is to present current judicial practice, concerning hearing cases stemming from appeals of Polish Competition Authority decisions. The relevant court tends to review the cases only on merits, omitting to address procedural infringements, clearly stated by the parties in appeals. In author’s opinion this common practice does not have a legal leg to stand on. Author analyses relevant laws and precedents pointing out, that full review of the decision is Court’s duty, which could not be neglected. Furthermore, according to ECHR rulings procedural guaranties should be assured on high level, especially in matters, where quasi-criminal fines are concerned. As a legal practitioner Author perceives possible crippling effect on effectiveness, assuming that the Court would have to review all steps of the proceedings before Competition Authority. So in conclusion Author proposes a compromise solution asserting, that the Court should at least address all procedural infringement counts stated in appeal.

Cet article vise essentiellement à présenter la pratique judiciaire actuelle pour ce qui est de connaître les affaires résultant d’un recours contre les décisions de l’autorité polonaise de concurrence. Le juge compétent pour ces affaires fait preuve d’une tendance à en connaître exclusivement le fond sans considérer les violations de procédure soulevées expressément dans les recours des parties. L’auteur est d’avis que cette pratique juridictionnelle est dépourvue de fondements juridiques. Il analyse les textes appropriés et l’acquis de la jurisprudence pour montrer qu’un contrôle complet de la décision est une obligation du juge, qui ne saurait être négligée. En plus de cela, conformément à la jurisprudence de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme, un niveau élevé de garanties procédurales doit être assuré, notamment dans les affaires susceptibles de sanctions quasi-pénales. L’auteur, qui est un praticien, y voit le risque potentiel de compromettre l’efficience de la procédure, en admettant que le juge soit amené à contrôler toutes les étapes de la procédure avant l’autorité de concurrence. Pour conclure, l’auteur propose une solution de compromis qui admettrait que le juge devrait au moins se prononcer sur les exceptions procédurales soulevées dans le recours.

Refine search results

1 Acta Iuris Stetinensis

1 Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies

1 Ignasiak M.

1 Stawicki A.

1 2020

1 2012

Search results

Refusal to adjourn a hearing due to the defender’s being ill vs. execution of the right of defence - comments on Article 378a § 1 of the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure

Competence of Common Courts in Poland in Competition Matters