Search results

1

Opinia prawna na temat petycji Sebastiana Adamowicza w sprawie nowelizacji art. 130 § 1 i 147a § 1 Kodeksu wykroczeń

100%

Bachmat P.

Zeszyty Prawnicze BAS

|

2017

|

issue 2(54)

113-137

EN

The first proposed amendment concerns the elimination of Article 120 of the Misdemeanours Code, what is justified by the fact that the concept of arms, ambition and explosive materials and devices does not encompass trees and coarse woody debris. The author justifies the necessity of that amendment analyzing inadequate regulations included in the provisions in their current shape. The second suggested amendment concerns a former replacement of the term “Health Maintenance Organisation” with the term “Healthcare Entity”. As a result of his modification it became more difficult to define the scope of criminalisation of acts under Article 147a of the Misdemeanours Code., i.e. running a healthcare maintenance organisation without required entry into a register or obligatory registration. The scope of both terms raises considerable doubts. In the past it was suggested that Article 147a of the Misdemeanours Codem should concern treatment performed by both doctors and nurses. It is necessary to amend the discussed provision in order to effectively define the activity which it concerns.

2

Czy przed piractwem domenowym można się bronić? Formy naruszeń i cywilnoprawne środki ochrony przed nieuprawnionym korzystaniem ze znaków towarowych w domenie internetowej

88%

Trzeciak-Wach K.

Prawo

|

2015

|

issue 318

219 - 233

EN

The subject of the consideration is mainly connected with the plans of launching new names of generic Top Level Domains (gTLD). The author tries to present some possibilities of law infringement which could be caused in the future, because of these operations. The aim of this paper is to show the legal solutions to help with the domain pirates infringements. The plurality of the new gTLD is the chance for domain pirates. In the present literature there are distinguished many forms of domain pirates such as: cybersquatting, cybertyping, cyberwildcatting and cybersmearing. All of them could be a form of using trademarks without rights to them. First of all, the author discusses the circumstances of trademarks infringement under Industrial Property Law. The author also comments on the types of activities which constitute unfair competition in relation to the use of trademarks in domains and suppression of Unfair Competition Act. In the analysis, there are also presented the ways of alternative dispute resolution and the new procedure against infringement establishes by ICANN.

3

Odszkodowanie z tytułu naruszenia praw autorskich – rozwój czy degeneracja?

88%

Czajkowska-Dąbrowska M.

Studia Iuridica

|

2016

|

vol. 64

61-82

PL

The article examines the claim for damages as regulated in Art. 79 section 1 point 3 letter b) of the Copyright Act and contains an assessment thereof presented against the background of European law. The claim for damages in the case of infringement of copyright is currently provided for in two variants: as compensation falling under general principles of liability for damages and, alternatively, as compensation taking the form of a lump sum. As far as the lump-sum compensation is concerned, it is not necessary for the claimant to prove actual damage. The amount of compensation in this form is set as a double amount (in the absence of culpability on the part of the infringer) or a triple amount (when the infringing conduct is culpable) of an “appropriate royalty”. Such a severe liability violates the civil law standards pertaining to the redress of damages, in particular it interferes with the compensative function of liability for damages. It simultaneously distorts the balance between the claim for a lump-sum compensation and other claims available to right holders in the case of infringement of copyright and, in wider perspective, the balance within the entire system of intellectual property law. It appears dubious whether the legal regulation of the claim for a lump-sum compensation contained in Art. 79 section 1 point 3 letter b) of the Copyright Act is in compliance with the Directive 2004/48/EC on the enforcement of intellectual property rights. Arguments in support of this view have been put forward in the article. Doubts which been expressed in that regard will most likely be clarified by the Court of Justice in its future response to the request for a preliminary ruling, which was made by the Supreme Court.

4

Roszczenie o zapłatę wielokrotności wynagrodzenia w polskim prawie autorskim a prawo europejskie

88%

Balcarczyk J., Okoń Z.

Kwartalnik Prawa Prywatnego

|

2012

|

vol. 21

|

issue 4

949 - 984

EN

The article investigates the way Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights was implemented to the Polish copyright law. It pays special attention to the provision of art. 79 sec. 1 of the Polish copyright law that provides for payment of double or, where the infringement is culpable, triple the amount of respective remuneration that would have been due as of the time of claiming it in exchange for the rightholder’s consent for the use of the work and analyzes whether it constitutes punitive damages that are prohibited by the above Directive. It explains the reasons rooted in economic analysis of law behind it and outlines some possible risks arising therefrom.

5

Particularities of Proving a Single and Continuous Infringement of EU Competition Rules

88%

Romić M. R.

Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies

|

2020

|

vol. 13

|

issue 22

FR

Une infraction unique et continue aux règles de concurrence de l’UE est une forme qualifiée d’infraction au droit de la concurrence de l’UE caractérisée par l’existence d’un projet commun aux entreprises ayant un objectif unique. Compte tenu de la spécificité de cette forme d’infraction, la preuve est différente de la procedure de preuve standard pour prouver les infractions aux règles de concurrence devant les tribunaux de l’UE. Cet article vise à donner un aperçu des règles de prevue à travers la jurisprudence de la Cour de justice de l’UE et à en analyser l’application dans la pratique.

EN

A single and continuous infringement of EU competition rules is a qualified form of infringement of EU Competition Law characterized by the existence of a global plan having a single objective between undertakings. Given the specificity of this form of infringement, proving it is somewhat different from the standard evidentiary process for proving infringements of competition rules before EU courts. This article aims to give an overview of the evidentiary rules through the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU and analyze their application in practice.

6

Procedura wymiaru i wykonania kar dyscyplinarnych wobec skazanych na karę pozbawienia wolności. Część I (art. 144 k.k.w.–art. 145 k.k.w.)

75%

Kwieciński A.

Nowa kodyfikacja prawa karnego

|

2013

|

vol. 29

199 - 218

EN

The article examines issues related to the procedure for the levels and enforcement of disciplinary penalties against convicts serving prison sentences. A particular emphasis is put on the collection of appropriate evidence, conduct of investigations, ensuring the right to defence, and criminal penalty directives. The author also gives alot of attention to persons authorised to establish the level of penalty and the scope of their competence as well as the procedure for appeal from and control of decisions taken as part of disciplinary actions.

7

Procedura wymiaru i wykonania kar dyscyplinarnych wobec skazanych na karę pozbawienia wolności. Część II (art. 146 k.k.w.–art. 149 k.k.w.)

75%

Kwieciński A.

Nowa kodyfikacja prawa karnego

|

2013

|

vol. 30

191 - 206

EN

This is the second part of an analysis of issues related to the procedure concerning the levels and enforcement of disciplinary penalties against people serving prison sentences. The author continues his analysis of the issue of sentencing guidelines in disciplinary proceedings. In addition, he tackles the problem of fl exible modification of disciplinary penalties. A lot of attention is devoted to issues concerning statutory limitations and enforcement of disciplinary penalties as well as supervisory assessment of decisions taken in the course of disciplinary proceedings against inmates.

8

Захист прав інтелектуальної власності на винаходи (корисні моделі) та промислові зразки

63%

Tarasenko L.

Wrocławsko-Lwowskie Zeszyty Prawnicze

|

2016

|

vol. 7

247-257

EN

The article deals with the issue of intellectual property protection for inventions, utility models and industrial designs. The author analyzes the legal regulation of these relations, in particular, such laws as the Civil Code of Ukraine, the Law of Ukraine “On Protection of Rights to Inventions and Utility Models”, Law of Ukraine “On Protection of Rights to Industrial Designs”. The author also analyzes the procedure and methods of patent rights protection. The author defines the general and special methods of the protection of these rights. The main positions of higher courts on the subject of scientific research are considered. The author comes to the conclusion that courts apply mainly methods provided by special legislation in cases of intellectual property protection for inventions, utility models and industrial designs, not by the general one. It is also found that the tax authorites facilitate the protection of intellectual property rights while the goods move through the customs borders of Ukraine by the suspension of customs clearance basing on customs registry data. After the registration of the object in the customs register of intellectual property rights using these data the tax authorites take measures to prevent the moving of counterfeit goods through the customs borders of Ukraine. The author also argues that the right to use the invention (utility model) or industrial design is defined as an exclusive one. Therefore, it is only the owner of a patent (or other authorized person) who can use his patented invention (utility model). It is stated that the burden of proof that the process of manufacturing products identical to those produced using the process protected by the patent rests on the person against whom there are reasonable grounds to believe that they violate the rights of the patent owner. Such a person shall rebut the presumption provided by law which reads that any product, the manufacturing process of which is patented, is considered to be manufactured using this process in the absence of evidence to the contrary. The author affirms that the publication in the media about the violations of intellectual property rights has a preventive nature. It is confirmed that only a court can deliver a decision of declaring a patent invalid; and the list of grounds for such a decision is exhaustive. The typical grounds for patent invalidation is the absence of the terms of legal protection granting. It is stated, that a court declaring a patent invalid is empowered to deliver a decision to oblige the State Intellectual Property Service of Ukraine to submit the data regarding the invalidation of the relevant patent for an invention (utility model), industrial design to the State Patent Register of Ukraine and publish this information in the official journal “Industrial Property”. The author concludes that a court during proceedings may combine several special methods of protection in the same case.

PL

W artykule podjęta została kwestia ochrony własności przemysłowej. Autor analizuje regulacje prawne dotyczące tych stosunków prawnych, w tym przepisy Kodeksu Cywilnego Ukrainy, Ustawy Ukrainy „O ochronie praw do wynalazków i wzorów użytkowych”, Ustawy Ukrainy „O ochronie praw do wzorów przemysłowych”. W artykule zaprezentowane zostały procedury i sposoby ochrony praw patentowych. Ustalone zostało istnienie ogólnych i szczególnych sposobów ochrony tych praw. Autor dokonał analizy opinii sądów instancji wyższej na temat badań naukowych i stwierdził, że w sprawach dotyczących ochrony własności przemysłowej najczęściej stosowane są przez sądy metody ochrony ustalone w ustawodawstwie szczególnym. Stwierdził, że organy podatkowe przyczyniają się do ochrony praw własności intelektualnej, co obserwujemy podczas przepływu towarów przez granicę celną Ukrainy. Służą temu dane rejestru celnego, uzyskiwane podczas kontroli celnej. Po rejestracji towaru w celnym rejestrze ruchomości organy podatkowe na podstawie danych rejestru podejmują kroki w celu zapobieżenia przepływu towarów fałszywych przez granicę celną Ukrainy. Autor udowodnił, że prawo do eksploatowania wynalazku (wzoru użytkowego) lub wzóru przemysłowego jest uznawane jako wyłączne, ponieważ tylko właściciel patentu (lub inna upoważniona osoba) jest uprawniona do eksploatowania własności intelektualnej w zakresie danego z wynalazku (wzoru użytkowego). Stwierdzone zostało, że ciężar udowodnienia tego, że proces wytwarzania produktów identycznych do tych, które były wyprodukowane z zastosowaniem chronionej patentem metody, spoczywa na osobie podejrzanej o naruszenie praw intelektualnych. Taka osoba musi obalić ustalone przez prawo domniemanie braku autentyczności danego towaru. Autor twierdzi, że publikacje w mediach dotyczące naruszeń praw własności intelektualnej mają charakter prewencyjny i odstraszają potencjalnych oszustów. Ponadto dowodzi, że tylko sąd może podjąć decyzję w sprawie uznania nieważności patentu, a wykaz podstaw do uznania nieważności patentu jest wyczerpujący. Głównymi podstawami do uznania patentu za nieważny jest brak chronionych prawem dóbr. Sąd w sporach dotyczących uznawania nieważności patentu może zobowiązać Państwowy Urząd Patentowy Ukrainy do wniesienia do Państwowego Rejestru Patentów Ukrainy informacji o unieważnieniu odpowiedniego patentu w zakresie wynalazku (wzoru użytkowego) i wzoru przemysłowego, nakładając jednocześnie na Urząd Patentowy obowiązek opublikowania tej informacji w Dzienniku Urzędowym pt. „Własność przemysłowa”.

9

Odszkodowanie z tytułu naruszenia praw autorskich – rozwój czy degeneracja?

63%

Czajkowska-Dąbrowska M.

Studia Iuridica

|

2016

|

vol. 64

61-82

EN

The article examines the claim for damages as regulated in Art. 79 section 1 point 3 letter b) of the Copyright Act and contains an assessment thereof presented against the background of European law. The claim for damages in the case of infringement of copyright is currently provided for in two variants: as compensation falling under general principles of liability for damages and, alternatively, as compensation taking the form of a lump sum. As far as the lump-sum compensation is concerned, it is not necessary for the claimant to prove actual damage. The amount of compensation in this form is set as a double amount (in the absence of culpability on the part of the infringer) or a triple amount (when the infringing conduct is culpable) of an “appropriate royalty”. Such a severe liability violates the civil law standards pertaining to the redress of damages, in particular it interferes with the compensative function of liability for damages. It simultaneously distorts the balance between the claim for a lump-sum compensation and other claims available to right holders in the case of infringement of copyright and, in wider perspective, the balance within the entire system of intellectual property law. It appears dubious whether the legal regulation of the claim for a lump-sum compensation contained in Art. 79 section 1 point 3 letter b) of the Copyright Act is in compliance with the Directive 2004/48/EC on the enforcement of intellectual property rights. Arguments in support of this view have been put forward in the article. Doubts which been expressed in that regard will most likely be clarified by the Court of Justice in its future response to the request for a preliminary ruling, which was made by the Supreme Court.

10

Konsekwencje naruszenia prawa pierwokupu lub prawa pierwszeństwa nabycia praw udziałowych

63%

Seroczyńska D.

Studia Iuridica

|

2018

|

vol. 77

139-157

PL

Determination of the legal consequences of transfer of shares performed with violation of the pre-emptive right or right of first refusal raises serious controversy in Polish jurisprudence and legal doctrine. This article concludes that if these kind of restrictions on transferability of shares are stipulated in the articles of association or statute of the company, their breach results in suspended ineffectiveness of such action against third parties. On the other hand, violation of the pre-emptive right or right of first refusal provided outside the company’s corporate act effects, in principle, in the inter partes consequences in the form of liability for damages. The complexity of the interpretation of relevant norms concerning the subject matter requires raising de lege ferenda postulate, the purpose of which is to facilitate the determination of the nature of pre-emptive right or right of first refusal on transfer of shares and the consequences of their infringement.

11

The Condition of Fault in Private Enforcement of Competition Law – a Comparative Analysis of U.S. v. Polish and European Approach

63%

Mackiewicz M.

Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies

|

2020

|

vol. 13

|

issue 21

71-98

FR

L’objectif de la loi polonaise sur les actions en dommages et intérêts pour les infractions au droit de la concurrence, qui se base sur le droit de l’UE et le transpose était de permettre aux entreprises d’utiliser efficacement l’exécution privée de leurs demandes de dommages et intérêts auprès des auteurs d’infractions au droit de la concurrence. La violation du droit de la concurrence est qualifiée comme un délit civil selon la loi sur les demandes d’indemnisation. Par conséquent, la loi sur les demandes d’indemnisation renvoie aux règles de responsabilité délictuelle. Les conditions de la responsabilité délictuelle classique en droit national n’ont pas exactement la même signification et portée dogmatique que les conditions de la responsabilité publique ou privée pour les infractions au droit national et européen de la concurrence. Dans la pratique, leur application par les tribunaux nationaux peut soulever de nombreuses questions concernant la conformité entre le droit national et le droit de l’UE. Le présent document vise à analyser l’une des principales conditions de la responsabilité délictuelle, à savoir la faute de l’entreprise ainsi que la faute de ses organes et dirigeants. Si on voulait comprendre la notion de faute dans les limites fixées par le droit civil, et suivre la formulation littérale des dispositions du code civil polonais relatives à la condition de faute, l’efficacité de l’exécution privée des demandes de dommages et intérêts résultant d’infractions au droit de la concurrence serait incertaine. Par conséquent, le présent article vise à fournir aux lecteurs une interprétation de la notion de faute, en tant que condition de la responsabilité des entreprises, qui permette d’atteindre l’objectif législatif de la loi sur les demandes d’indemnisation et de respecter les principes d’efficacité et d’équivalence du droit de l’UE. Afin de présenter un cadre complet, cet article examine également la jurisprudence de la CJUE concernant la “faute antitrust”, accompagnée d’une analyse comparative des approches allemande et française de la condition de faute ainsi que des lois antitrust américaines dans le même domaine.

EN

The purpose of the Polish Act on Claims for Damages for Remedying the Damage Caused by Infringements of Competition Law, based on and implementing EU law – the Damages Directive, was to enable undertakings to effectively use private enforcement of their damages claims from competition law offenders. Infringement of competition law is classified as a tort according to the said Act on Claims. Therefore, the Act on Claims refers to tort liability rules. The conditions of classic tort liability in domestic law do not have exactly the same dogmatic meaning and scope as the conditions of public or private liability for the infringements of domestic and EU competition law. In practice, their application by national courts may rise many questions regarding conformity between domestic and EU law. This paper aims to analyse one of the key conditions of tort liability, that is, the fault of both the undertaking – the offenders, as well as the fault of their governing bodies and officers. If one were to understand the notion of fault within the limits laid down by civil law, and follow the literal wording of the Polish Civil Code’s provisions referring to the fault condition, the efficiency of private enforcement of damage claims arising from infringements of competition law would be doubtful. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to provide the readers with such an interpretation of the notion of fault, as a condition of liability of undertakings, that the legislative purpose of the Act on Claims is achieved and that the principles of efficiency and equivalence of the EU law are observed. In order to present a comprehensive picture, this paper will also discuss the case law of the CJEU concerning ‘anti-trust fault’, accompanied by a comparative analysis of the German and French approach to the fault condition as well as United States antitrust laws in the same area.

12

Roszczenie o zapłatę wielokrotności stosownego wynagrodzenia w prawie autorskim – głos w obronie status quo na dzień przed wyrokiem Trybunału Konstytucyjnego

51%

Sokołowska D.

Studia Iuridica

|

2017

|

vol. 72

349-373

PL

The article contains the response to the criticism of the solution regulated under article 79 section 1 point 3 letter b of the Copyright and Related Rights Act made before the Constitutional Tribunal rendered its judgment of 23 June 2015 repealing he above-mentioned legal provision. The genesis of article 79 section 1 point 3 letter b leads to the conclusion that it constituted an autonomous institution of the Polish copyright law. In particular, the claim for payment of a triple amount of the respective remuneration, where the copyright infringement is culpable, was not of a penal nature, neither was it contradictory to the Polish model of liability for damages, moreover at the same time, it was in accordance with the provisions of the Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights.

13

2010 and 2011 EU Competition Law and Sector-specific Regulatory Jurisprudence and Case Law Developments with a Nexus to Poland

32%

Mościbroda A., Kuik K.

Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies

|

2012

|

vol. 5(7)

157-190

EN

This third overview of EU competition and sector-specific regulatory jurisprudential and case law developments with a nexus to Poland covers the years 2010 and 2011. This period of time is worth noting for several reasons. First, EU courts delivered a significant number of judgments in ‘Polish’ cases including an increased number of preliminary rulings. Second, 2010-2011 developments were dominated by judgments and decisions concerning telecoms. Finally, the Commission adopted only a handful of Polish State aid decisions following a formal investigation procedure under Article 108(2) TFEU. The main developments in telecoms relate to the Court of Justice's preliminary reference judgment in Tele 2 Polska focusing on the interpretation of Regulation 1/2003 and the PTC v UKE ruling that dealt with number portability charges. Relevant is also the antitrust prohibition decision issued by the Commission against Telekomunikacja Polska S.A. for its refusal to grant access to its wholesale broadband services. In other fields, the Court of Justice delivered three State aid judgments (including two appeals against pre-2010 judgments of the General Court) and two judgments in infringement proceedings (regarding pre EU Accession marketing authorisations for medicines and the reutilisation of data from the public sector). The General Court ruled on appeal in the butadiene rubber cartel case (e.g. in Trade-Stomil v Commission). Finally, the Commission dealt with a merger case with a truly Polish specificity (Kraft Foods/ Cadbury), approved subject to divestiture of the E. Wedel brand.

FR

Ce troisième aperçu portant sur les développements de la réglementation relative au droit de la concurrence de l’UE et droit séctoriel, ainsi qu’à la jurisprudence ayant un lien imporatnt avec la Pologne, couvre les années 2010 et 2011. Cette période vaut l’intérêt pour plusieurs raisons. Premièrement, les tribunaux de l'UE ont délivré un nombre important d'arrêts dans les cas « polonais » dont un nombre croissant de questions préjudicielles. Deuxièmement, les développements en 2010-2011 ont été dominés par les jugements et décisions concernant les télécommunications (télécoms). Enfin, la Commission n’a adopté qu’un petit nombre de décisions sur les aides de l’État polonais à la suite d'une procédure formelle d'examen conformément à l'article 108 (2) du TFUE. Les développements principaux dans les télécoms se rapportent au renvoi préjudiciel de la Cour de justice dans le cas Tele 2 Polska portant sur l'interprétation du règlement 1/2003 et celui relatif au cas UKE v PTC sur les frais de portabilité des numéros. La décision concernant une infraction en application adoptée par la Commission contre Telekomunikacja Polska SA pour son refus d'accorder l'accès à ses services de gros de la large bande est également pertinente. Dans les autres domaines, la CJCE a rendu trois arrêts sur les aides d'État (deux recours contre les arrêts rendus par le Tribunal de première instance avant 2010) et deux arrêts dans une procédure d'infraction (en ce qui concerne les autorisations de marketing pour la médecine préalables à l'adhésion à l’UE et la réutilisation des données du secteur public). Le Tribunal de première instance a statué sur le recours dans le cas de cartel caoutchouc butadiène (par exemple le cas Trade-Stomil v Commission). Enfin, la Commission a traité un cas de fusion avec une spécificité typiquement polonaise (Kraft Foods / Cadbury), approuvé assujetti à la cession de la marque E. Wedel.

Refine search results

Opinia prawna na temat petycji Sebastiana Adamowicza w sprawie nowelizacji art. 130 § 1 i 147a § 1 Kodeksu wykroczeń

Czy przed piractwem domenowym można się bronić? Formy naruszeń i cywilnoprawne środki ochrony przed nieuprawnionym korzystaniem ze znaków towarowych w domenie internetowej

Odszkodowanie z tytułu naruszenia praw autorskich – rozwój czy degeneracja?

Roszczenie o zapłatę wielokrotności wynagrodzenia w polskim prawie autorskim a prawo europejskie

Particularities of Proving a Single and Continuous Infringement of EU Competition Rules

Procedura wymiaru i wykonania kar dyscyplinarnych wobec skazanych na karę pozbawienia wolności. Część I (art. 144 k.k.w.–art. 145 k.k.w.)

Procedura wymiaru i wykonania kar dyscyplinarnych wobec skazanych na karę pozbawienia wolności. Część II (art. 146 k.k.w.–art. 149 k.k.w.)

Захист прав інтелектуальної власності на винаходи (корисні моделі) та промислові зразки

Odszkodowanie z tytułu naruszenia praw autorskich – rozwój czy degeneracja?

Konsekwencje naruszenia prawa pierwokupu lub prawa pierwszeństwa nabycia praw udziałowych

The Condition of Fault in Private Enforcement of Competition Law – a Comparative Analysis of U.S. v. Polish and European Approach

Roszczenie o zapłatę wielokrotności stosownego wynagrodzenia w prawie autorskim – głos w obronie status quo na dzień przed wyrokiem Trybunału Konstytucyjnego

2010 and 2011 EU Competition Law and Sector-specific Regulatory Jurisprudence and Case Law Developments with a Nexus to Poland