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

Results found: 7

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  formal requirements
help Sort By:

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

Przebieg kontroli skarbowej zgodny z przepisami prawa – zadania i kompetencje urzędów skarbowych

100%
Kowalczyk M.
Kontrola Państwowa
|
2013
|
vol. 58
|
issue 6 (353)
24-32
EN
The Act on Fiscal Control has been in force for over twenty years already, still there is little literature on the issue of control proceedings based on this act. In her article, the author describes the course of those proceedings, discussing selected problems and their consequences. She proposes to simplify the procedures and formal requirements, so that the fiscal body can have strictly control powers that do not breach the principles of a democratic state of law.
2

Skutki naruszenia wymogów formalnychw prawie prywatnym – proporcjonalność i sposoby jej zapewnienia

70%
Grochowski M.
Kwartalnik Prawa Prywatnego
|
2015
|
vol. 24
|
issue 4
785-816
EN
The question of proportionality is undoubtedly an overriding concern of forma requirements in the modern private law – approaching form as a functionally motivated regulatory tool (designed to reach particular economic and social goals). A the goals in question and particular goals for their fulfilment (both formalities itself, as well as the consequences prescribed for their non-observance) are set forth generally, regardless of any particular legal dealing already made, the interdependence between these two spheres (“goals” and “means”) is being predetermined in equally abstract terms. This peculiarity – proper both (yet in different shape) for the requirements enacted through statute and stipulated by the parties – entails the need of assessment, whether formalities and effects of their breach remain actually proportional against the particular circumstances arising in their application. In some instances the balance in question can be distorted due to the occurrences and conditions existing both at the time of decision making or prior to it, as well as arising later on. In these cases emerges the need for restoring proportionality – and, if recognized, incentivizes to seek for remedial tools. The text summarizes the most common ways of maintaining and restoring proportionality, developed by the judiciary (in discourse with the doctrine) and statutory law, supplemented by the parties’ dealings. Upon these observations it attempts to identify the more common structures and concepts underlying the issue of proportionality in the field of formal requirements.
3

Nowe koncepcje regulacji wymogów formalnych w prawie polskim

70%
Grochowski M.
Kwartalnik Prawa Prywatnego
|
2017
|
vol. 26
|
issue 4
805-843
EN
The text addresses the foundational problems of the amendment to the Civil Code of Poland of 10 July 2015. It introduced significant alterations to the provisions on formal requirements, seeking to modernize them and provide higher degree of flexibility. The crux element of this reform has been the introduction of a new type of formal requirement – the documentary form (Article 772 of the Civil Code) – and of the definition of a document (Article 773 of the Civil Code). These new legislative concepts have been based on an assumption of diving regulatory tasks between the legislation and the practice (both conduct of the parties to juridical acts and the judiciary). They do not indicate exhaustively technical features that have to be met to observe particular formal requirement, but only frame them in a general way, indicating the core functional features (e.g. intelligibility of a document’s content and identifiability of its author). This is a novel approach, providing formal requirements with a higher degree of flexibility at the cost of precision and definitiveness of a formal requirement. Construed in this way, formal requirement has to supplemented by the parties to the particular juridical act (who can choose particular way of communication statements between them) or courts (which typically scrutinize ex post, if particular way of conveying information satisfied the formal requirement). The text expands on this foundational observation, framing the conceptual and practical features of the attitude adopted in the amendment. It tries also to analyze the newly-adopted solutions against the background of similar concepts in the European Union regulations and to integrate them with the already existing framework of domestic private law.
4

A Gloss for the Judgement of the Constitutional Tribunal of November 10, 2009, File Ref. No. P88/08

70%
Zarzycki A.
Roczniki Nauk Prawnych
|
2017
|
vol. 27
|
issue 3 English Online Version
121-134
EN
The presented gloss, addressing the judgement of the Constitutional Tribunal, file ref. no. P88/08, issued on November 10, 2009, concerning the decision under art. 28 para. 1 of the act of 28 February 2003 (Bankruptcy and Reorganisation Law) [referred to as BRL] as regards the debtor who is not using an advocate or legal counsel, demonstrates inconsistency of art. 28 para. 1 of the above law with art. 45 and art. 32 para. 1 of the Constitution. The Speaker of the Sejm, Public Prosecutor General and the Research and Analysis Bureau have presented their positions approving the compliance of art. 28 para. 1 BRL with art. 32 para. 1 and art. 45 para. 1 of the Constitution. The Constitutional Tribunal draws attention to numerous formal requirements, especially concerning the bankruptcy petition filed by the debtor. The Tribunal argues that the right to trial may be infringed not only directly, but also indirectly as a result of the procedural requirements being formed by the legislator in the manner which makes the initiation of the proceedings excessively difficult. Subsequently, the Tribunal points out that excessive strictness connected with considerable formalism of petitions for bankruptcy does not fulfil a compensatory function, and does not satisfactorily protect the debtor and his undertaking. In the context of professional representatives, the Tribunal expresses its position on the professional skills that assure professional legal service in court proceedings. The Constitutional Tribunal drew a distinction between debtors having a professional representative and debtors acting on their own, by defining a relevant feature that allows to separate a group, as a consequence the provision in question does not fulfil the constitutional requirements in art. 45 para. 1 of the Constitution. As regards art. 32 of the Constitution, the Constitutional Tribunal presents the view that with considerable complexity and strictness connected with the lack of representation, in a concrete case the constitutionally guaranteed rights may be infringed. As part of the judgement of the Constitutional Tribunal, a separate statement was made in the part concerning the compliance of art. 28 BRL with art. 45 para. 1 of the Constitution. The presented gloss shares the argumentation observed by the Constitutional Tribunal, at the same time considering the public interest, negative results of the late submission of the bankruptcy petition, pointing to the legislator that greater protection of entrepreneurs debtors may be considered.
5

A Gloss for the Judgement of the Constitutional Tribunal of November 10, 2009, File Ref. No. P88/08

70%
Zarzycki A.
Roczniki Nauk Prawnych
|
2017
|
vol. 27
|
issue 2 English Online Version
121-134
EN
The presented gloss, addressing the judgement of the Constitutional Tribunal, file ref. no. P88/08, issued on November 10, 2009, concerning the decision under art. 28 para. 1 of the act of 28 February 2003 (Bankruptcy and Reorganisation Law) [referred to as BRL] as regards the debtor who is not using an advocate or legal counsel, demonstrates inconsistency of art. 28 para. 1 of the above law with art. 45 and art. 32 para. 1 of the Constitution. The Speaker of the Sejm, Public Prosecutor General and the Research and Analysis Bureau have presented their positions approving the compliance of art. 28 para. 1 BRL with art. 32 para. 1 and art. 45 para. 1 of the Constitution. The Constitutional Tribunal draws attention to numerous formal requirements, especially concerning the bankruptcy petition filed by the debtor. The Tribunal argues that the right to trial may be infringed not only directly, but also indirectly as a result of the procedural requirements being formed by the legislator in the manner which makes the initiation of the proceedings excessively difficult. Subsequently, the Tribunal points out that excessive strictness connected with considerable formalism of petitions for bankruptcy does not fulfil a compensatory function, and does not satisfactorily protect the debtor and his undertaking. In the context of professional representatives, the Tribunal expresses its position on the professional skills that assure professional legal service in court proceedings. The Constitutional Tribunal drew a distinction between debtors having a professional representative and debtors acting on their own, by defining a relevant feature that allows to separate a group, as a consequence the provision in question does not fulfil the constitutional requirements in art. 45 para. 1 of the Constitution. As regards art. 32 of the Constitution, the Constitutional Tribunal presents the view that with considerable complexity and strictness connected with the lack of representation, in a concrete case the constitutionally guaranteed rights may be infringed. As part of the judgement of the Constitutional Tribunal, a separate statement was made in the part concerning the compliance of art. 28 BRL with art. 45 para. 1 of the Constitution. The presented gloss shares the argumentation observed by the Constitutional Tribunal, at the same time considering the public interest, negative results of the late submission of the bankruptcy petition, pointing to the legislator that greater protection of entrepreneurs debtors may be considered.
6
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Access to the Supreme Court – the English Approach

61%
Sorabji J.
Studia Iuridica
|
2019
|
vol. 81
152-171
EN
The United Kingdom Supreme Court (UKSC) is a relatively new supreme court, as it started to sit as recently as 2009. It is the statutory successor to the House of Lords’ judicial powers. The text sets out the following issues: the court’s jurisdiction, standing, permission to appeal requirements, substantive nature of appeals, tied decisions and reopening of appeals. Next, the author proceeds to examine the nature of the remedies avaible to it, and any restrictions that apply to them. The text demonstrates the UKSC’s wide-ranging appellate jurisdiction, which enables it to exercise the full range of powers of the courts from which appeals are made it. However, in the majority of cases, access to the UKSC is limited due to the Court’s focus on legal questions of general public importance. As a result of it, the UKSC deals with a small number of cases on an annual basis. Although the Court is not supposed to carry out a judicial review of legislative action, the author hints at a nascent movement towards establishing a US-style power to strike down legislation.
7

Glosa do wyroku Trybunału Konstytucyjnego z dnia 10 listopada 2009 roku, sygn. akt P88/08

51%
Zarzycki A.
Roczniki Nauk Prawnych
|
2017
|
vol. 27
|
issue 3
145-159
PL
Zaprezentowana glosa dotyczy wyroku Trybunału Konstytucyjnego z dnia 10 listopada 2009 r., sygn. akt. P88/08, w przedmiocie orzeczenia art. 28 ust. 1 ustawy z dnia 28 lutego 2003 r. – Prawo upadłościowe i naprawcze [zwane p.u.n.], w zakresie odnoszącym się do dłużnika niekorzystającego z pomocy adwokata lub radcy prawnego, wskazuje na niezgodność art. 28 ust. 1 wyżej wymienionej ustawy z art. 45 Konstytucji Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej oraz nie niezgodność z art. 32 ust. 1 Konstytucji. Marszałek Sejmu, Prokurator Generalny, Biuro Studiów i Analiz przedstawili stanowisko aprobujące zgodność art. 28 ust. 1 p.u.n. z art. 32 ust. 1 i art. 45 ust. 1 Konstytucji. Trybunał Konstytucyjny wskazuje na liczne wymagania formalne, szczególnie wobec wniosku o ogłoszenie upadłości składanego przez dłużnika. Podnosi, że prawo do sądu może być naruszone nie tylko bezpośrednio, ale również pośrednio wskutek takiego ukształtowania przez ustawodawcę wymagań proceduralnych, które czynią zainicjowanie postępowania nadmiernie utrudnione. W konsekwencji zwraca uwagę, że nadmierny rygoryzm połączony ze znaczną formalizacją wniosku o ogłoszenie upadłości nie spełnia funkcji kompensacyjnej, nie chroni w dostateczny sposób dłużnika, jego przedsiębiorstwa. W kontekście profesjonalnych pełnomocników wyraża stanowisko o przygotowaniu zawodowym, które zapewnia fachowość obsługi prawnej w postępowaniu procesowym przed sądami. Trybunał Konstytucyjny dokonał rozróżnienia między dłużnikami mającymi zawodowego pełnomocnika i działającymi samodzielnie, określając cechę relewantną, która pozwala na wyodrębnienie grupy. W następstwie kwestionowany przepis nie spełnia wymogów konstytucyjnych w art. 45 ust. 1 Konstytucji. W odniesieniu do art. 32 Konstytucji Trybunał Konstytucyjny prezentuje pogląd, że przy znacznym skomplikowaniu i rygoryzmie połączonym z brakiem reprezentacji w konkretnym przypadku dojść może do naruszenia praw gwarantowanych konstytucyjnie. W ramach wyroku Trybunału Konstytucyjnego zgłoszono zdanie odrębne w części dotyczącej kwestii zgodności art. 28 p.u.n. z art. 45 ust. 1 Konstytucji. Niniejsza glosa podziela argumentacje, którą zauważył Trybunał Konstytucyjny, jednocześnie zwracając uwagę na interes społeczny, negatywne skutki spóźnionego złożenia wniosku o ogłoszenie upadłości, wskazując sygnalizacyjnie ustawodawcy na rozważenie zwiększenia ochrony przedsiębiorców dłużników.
EN
The presented gloss refers to Verdict, P88/08, issued on 10th November 2009 by the Constitutional Tribunal concerning the decision under Article 28 Section 1 of the Act of 28th February 2003 – Bankruptcy and Reorganisation Law [referred to as BRL] as regards the debtor who is not using a solicitor or legal counsel, it indicates inconsistency of Article 28 Section 1 of the above Act with Article 45 of the Polish Constitution and no inconsistency with Article 32 Section 1 of the Constitution. The Speaker of the Sejm, the Prosecutor General and the Research and Analysis Bureau have presented the position approving the compliance of Article 28 Section 1 of BRL with Article 32 Section 1 and Article 45 Section 1 of the Constitution. The Constitutional Tribunal draws attention to numerous formal requirements, especially concerning the bankruptcy petition filed by the debtor. The Tribunal states that the right to court may be infringed not only directly, but also indirectly as a result of the procedural requirements being formed by the legislator in the way making the initiation of the proceedings excessively difficult. Subsequently, the Tribunal points out that excessive strictness connected with considerable formalization of the bankruptcy petition does not perform the compensation function, and does not satisfactorily protect the debtor and his enterprise. In the context of professional representatives, the Tribunal expresses its position on the professional skills that assure professional legal service in court proceedings. The Constitutional Tribunal made a distinction between debtors having a professional representative and debtors acting on their own, by defining a relevant feature that allows to separate a group, as a consequence the provision in question does not fulfil the constitutional requirements in Article 45 Section 1 of the Constitution. As regards Article 32 of the Constitution, the Constitutional Tribunal presents the view that with considerable complexity and strictness connected with the lack of representation, in a concrete case the constitutionally guaranteed rights may be infringed. As part of the verdict of the Constitutional Tribunal a separate statement was made in the part concerning the compliance of article 28 of BRL with Article 45 Section 1 of the Constitution. The present gloss shares the argumentation observed by the Constitutional Tribunal, at the same time paying attention to the public interest, negative results of the late submission of the bankruptcy petition, pointing to the legislator that greater protection of entrepreneurs debtors may be considered.
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.