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

Refine search results

Journals help

  1. 4 Przegląd Sejmowy

Authors help

  1. 4 Ziółkowski M.

Years help

  1. 3 2025

  2. 1 2024

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

Glosa do Postanowienia składu siedmiu sędziów Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 13 grudnia 2023 r., sygn. akt KZP 5/23•. Krok w stronę koncepcji nieważności czy unieważnialności wyroku Trybunału Konstytucyjnego?

100%
Ziółkowski M.
Przegląd Sejmowy
|
2024
|
issue 6(185)
159–175
EN
The article discusses the decision of the Polish Supreme Court, which refused to recognise the Constitutional Tribunal in Poland as a body constitutionally authorised to rule on the hierarchical incompatibility of norms. Consequently, the Supreme Court ruled that the judgement of the Tribunal does not have constitutional effect. The Supreme Court pointed out that the Tribunal’s panel was appointed in violation of the law and does not provide a guarantee of judicial independence. Firstly, the article discusses whether the Supreme Court’s reasoning supports such a firm conclusion. Secondly, it considers the problem of the legal basis for the Supreme Court’s action. Thirdly, the article attempts to outline the legal framework (nullity v. invalidity) of the Supreme Court’s decision with regard to the judgements of the Constitutional Tribunal.
2
Content available remote

Opinia prawna na temat skutków prawnych Wyroku Trybunału Konstytucyjnego z dnia 10 września 2024 r., sygn. akt U 4/24

100%
Ziółkowski M.
Przegląd Sejmowy
|
2025
|
issue 2(187)
177–193
EN
The opinion is predominantly of a legal doctrinal research nature with some normative insights. It analyses the effects of the judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal regarding the Pegasus software inquiry committee. The Tribunal declared the legal basis for the functioning of the committee unconstitutional. The opinion discusses the legal effects of the judgment, and it refers to the unconstitutional composition of the Tribunal’s adjudicating bench. It also analyses the interpretation of Article 190(1) and (2) of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. The author argues that the Tribunal’s judgment did not lead to the repeal of the legal bases for the functioning of the committee as it was not published.
3
Content available remote

Opinia prawna na temat skutków prawnych Wyroku Trybunału Konstytucyjnego z dnia 10 września 2024 r., sygn. akt U 4/24

100%
Ziółkowski M.
Przegląd Sejmowy
|
2025
|
issue 2(187)
EN
The opinion is predominantly of a legal doctrinal research nature with some normative insights. It analyses the effects of the judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal regarding the Pegasus software inquiry committee. The Tribunal declared the legal basis for the functioning of the committee unconstitutional. The opinion discusses the legal effects of the judgment, and it refers to the unconstitutional composition of the Tribunal’s adjudicating bench. It also analyses the interpretation of Article 190(1) and (2) of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. The author argues that the Tribunal’s judgment did not lead to the repeal of the legal bases for the functioning of the committee as it was not published.
4
Content available remote

Notatka na temat skutków prawnych Postanowienia Trybunału Konstytucyjnego z dnia 3 października 2024 r., sygn. akt K 24/24

100%
Ziółkowski M.
Przegląd Sejmowy
|
2025
|
issue 2(187)
195-201
EN
The memorandum is of a legal doctrinal research nature. It analyses the consequences of the Constitutional Tribunal’s provisional decision of 3 October 2024 for the activities of the inquiry committee. In this provisional decision, the Constitutional Tribunal ordered the committee to refrain from taking any action until the case before the Tribunal is determined. The memorandum discusses the legal defects of the provisional decision resulting from the fact that the composition of the Constitutional Tribunal’s adjudicating bench was unlawful, and it refers to the interpretation of Article 190(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. The memorandum ends with the claim that there is no legal basis for issuing the provisional decision securing the application.
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.