Search results

1

LEGAL REGULATIONS OF GAMBLING MARKET’S ORGANIZATION IN POLAND. SELECTED ISSUES IN THE LIGHT OF NEW PLANS OF AMENDING THE GAMBLING LAW OF 2009

100%

KOSIŃSKI E.

Kultura Bezpieczeństwa. Nauka – Praktyka – Refleksje

|

2017

|

vol. 26(26)

172-197

EN

The phenomenon of gambling finds its origins in the beginning of human race. The Polish act of 19 November 2009 on gambling games came into effect on the day of 1 January 2010 and “determines conditions of organization and principles of the conduct of business within the games of chance, mutual bids and games on machines” (art. 1 of the 2009 act). This present article is aimed at examination of the proposed amendment of above-mentioned act on gambling games in terms of the law of the European Union, especially in the light of the case law of the courts of the European Union. The scrutiny is provided under the formal-dogmatic method as far as an analysis of the text of legal document, together with the method of a critical analysis of legal writing and judicature of the appropriate courts. The 2016 proposed amendment bill of the 2009 act on gambling games and some other acts (The Sejm press No. 795) puts forward the change in art. 5 of the 2009 act on gambling in this way, that monopoly of the state shall cover subsequently: a conduct of business in lottos, cash lotteries, games of the telebingo and games on machines undertaken outside casinos. In the draft of law at stakethere are quantitative restriction concerning the location of games and provision of a certain set of principles in the area of organising games on machines proposed, too. There are additionally requirements and restrictions relating to the organisers of games on machines introduced. Therefore, it must be underlined that according to the Court of Justice of the European Union (the European Court of Justice and the General Court) case law any restrictions adopted by the state towards the gambling sector of economy should limit the access of consumers to the gambling (to reduce the supply) in the so-called genuine and realistic way. Secondly, these regulations should have cohesive and systematic manner. The Tribunal repeatedly indicated, that in the situation when the given Member State is implementing a severe regulation and restrictions on the gambling sector, simultaneously conducting activity in this sector on a domestic market by itself, such state cannot refer to the public order and the necessity to hinder an access to gambling. The question of budget receipts is not meaningless in such terms, neverttheless it cannot constitute the only, or the main, justification for infringements of the fundamental rights and liberties of the Treaty on the Functionig of the European Union (see cases: C-275/92 brothers Schindler, C-124/97 Läärä and others, C-67/98 Zenatti, C-6/01 Anomar and others, C-243/01 Gambelli and others, joined cases C-338/04, C-359/04 and C-360/04 Placanica and others). In conclusion, there may be a positive opinion articulated as far as opening of the possibility to conduct games on machines outside casinos. The withdrawal from the prohibition of organising games outside casinos seems to be rational. However there are certain items which deserves criticism, like an extension of the state monopoly in the area of gambling over the games on machines. Moreover, it is not reasonable to charge the special state treasury’s company with the of the organization of the mentioned monopoly in games on machines. It is firstly because of additional extra costs, the lack of the knowledge of the very specific market, the lack of nation-wide structures and the logistics of the undertaking (storing machines, transportation, repairment, service center, devices etc.), and secondly due to reducing the economic freedom of private entrepreneurs which legally operate on this market for last decades. It appears that he Polish private capital shall not be replaced by the public economic initiative, and other measures as to achieve the public goals shall be involved, like certain proper fiscal mechanisms in the area of the gambling sector (appropriately constructed taxes guaranteeing budgetrevenue at an expected level).

2

Pojęcie hazardu w prawie hazardowym wybranych państw europejskich. Część I. Pojęcie hazardu w przepisach niezawierających nazw definiowanych „hazard” lub „gry hazardowe”

86%

Duda-Hyz M.

Krytyka Prawa. Niezależne studia nad prawem

|

2020

|

vol. 12

|

issue 1

174-192

EN

The article is the first in a series of papers to present and analyse the meaning that is ascribed to the notions of ‘gambling’ and ‘gambling games’ in the gambling law provisions of selected European countries, as well as to confront the normative meaning with gambling characteristics from the perspective of social sciences. The following parts of the paper analyse examples of those provisions which do not contain any term for a broad catalogue of gambling activities, as well as selected provisions containing legal definitions of ‘games of chance’ (‘games of luck’). The article mainly uses methods of comparative law. The presentation of the characteristics of gambling from the perspective of social sciences is based on the achievements of social scientists. The research is based on the following research theses. Firstly, regulatory models in which the gambling law provisions specify the characteristics of gambling without indicating a name covering a collective category of gambling games in the definiendum are rare. Such solutions are typical for countries which have so far pursued restrictive gambling policies. Secondly, both in the legal systems in which there is no legal definition of gambling under gambling law and also against the background of the definitions of legal games of chance, one may notice significant differences in the way in which individual features of gambling games are specified, i.e. the dependence of the outcome of a game on chance, player’s financial involvement and the winnings.

PL

Artykuł stanowi pierwsze z cyklu opracowań, których celem jest przedstawienie i analiza znaczenia, jakie przypisuje się pojęciom „hazard” i „gry hazardowe” w prze pisach prawa hazardowego wybranych państw europejskich, a także skonfrontowanie normatywnego znaczenia z cechami hazardu w ujęciu nauk społecznych. Analizie poddano przykłady takich unormowań, w treści których nie występuje żadna nazwa na określenie katalogu przedsięwzięć o cechach gier hazardowych, a także wybrane regulacje zawierające definicje legalne „gier losowych” („gier szczęścia”). W opracowaniu wykorzystano przede wszystkim metody komparatystyki prawniczej. W zakresie, w jakim przedstawiono cechy hazardu w ujęciu nauk społecznych, oparto się na dorobku przedstawicieli tych nauk. Przeprowadzone badania opierają się na następujących tezach badawczych. Po pierwsze, modele regulacji, w których na gruncie przepisów prawa hazardowego określono cechy zjawiska hazardu bez wskazania w definiendum nazwy obejmującej zbiorczą kategorię gier hazardowych należą do odosobnionych. Po drugie, zarówno w systemach prawnych, w których na gruncie prawa hazardowego nie występuje definicja legalna hazardu, jak i na tle definicji legalnych gier losowych, dostrzegalne są różnice w sposobie określania poszczególnych cech gier hazardowych, tj. zależności wyniku gry od przypadku, zaangażowania majątkowego gracza oraz wygranej.

3

„Przepisy techniczne” w systemie prawa polskiego

86%

Sobczak J.

Themis Polska Nova

|

2014

|

issue 1(6)

71-91

EN

The term “technical regulations” was developed in Directive 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, and it comes down to the obligation to provide information concerning products and rules of the information society. The reason behind said solutions was to lead to unification on the Union internal market. Failure to fulfil the obligation of notification triggers serious consequences in legal transactions. From the point of view of the European Court of Justice, national judge, who is primarily a Union judge, may not use non-notified norms. In this respect there appeared discrepancies in judicial decisions of the Supreme Court, where some adjudicating panels held that in cases in which non-notified technical regulations were used it was necessary to ask the Constitutional Tribunal whether these norms were in force. However, the European Court of Justice clearly indicated that the scopes of cognition of the European Court of Justice and national constitutional tribunals do not coincide. The Court pointed out that failure to use a non-notified technical norm is not.

Refine search results

1 Krytyka Prawa. Niezależne studia nad prawem

1 Kultura Bezpieczeństwa. Nauka – Praktyka – Refleksje

1 Themis Polska Nova

1 2020

1 2018

1 2014

1 Duda-Hyz M.

1 KOSIŃSKI E.

1 Sobczak J.

LEGAL REGULATIONS OF GAMBLING MARKET’S ORGANIZATION IN POLAND. SELECTED ISSUES IN THE LIGHT OF NEW PLANS OF AMENDING THE GAMBLING LAW OF 2009

Pojęcie hazardu w prawie hazardowym wybranych państw europejskich. Część I. Pojęcie hazardu w przepisach niezawierających nazw definiowanych „hazard” lub „gry hazardowe”

„Przepisy techniczne” w systemie prawa polskiego