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

Results found: 8

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  legal professional privilege
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Niezapowiedziana kontrola Prezesa UOKiK – nowy standard pozyskiwania dowodów w formie elektronicznej. Glosa do postanowienia Sądu Ochrony Konkurencji i Konsumentów z 7 marca 2017 r., XVII Amz 15/17

100%
Skurzyński P., Gac M.
internetowy Kwartalnik Antymonopolowy i Regulacyjny
|
2017
|
vol. 6
|
issue 8
115-120
PL
7 marca 2017 r. Sąd Ochrony Konkurencji i Konsumentów (dalej: SOKiK) wydał istotne orzeczenie dotyczące zakresu uprawnień Prezesa Urzędu Ochrony Konkurencji i Konsumentów (dalej: Prezes UOKiK) w trakcie przeszukań prowadzonych w sprawach dotyczących praktyk ograniczających konkurencję. Orzeczenie to odnosi się do praktycznych aspektów przeszukiwania i pozyskiwania przez Prezesa UOKiK dokumentów w formie elektronicznej (np. systemów IT, dysków twardych, korespondencji e-mail). Można pokusić się nawet o stwierdzenie, że analizowane orzeczenie w praktyce wyznacza nowy standard prowadzenia przez Prezesa UOKiK przeszukań, umożliwiający przeszukiwanym przedsiębiorcom uzyskanie większej niż dotychczas kontroli nad zakresem dokumentów przeglądanych przez urzędników dokonujących przeszukania. Dodatkowo, omawiane postanowienie SOKiK dotyka także kwestii tajemnicy adwokackiej/radcowskiej (legal professional privilege; dalej: LPP), dając podstawę do dalszej debaty na temat zakresu LPP na gruncie polskiego prawa konkurencji.
EN
The commentary discusses the order of the Polish Court of Competition and Consumer Protection regarding the powers of the Polish Competition Authority (the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection) to search IT systems and hardware (e-mails and hard disks) during dawn raids. This order prohibits the current practice of the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection, according to which electronic data is copied without prior selection and taken from the premises of the inspected undertaking for further analysis at the authority's premises. The order clearly states that the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection conducting an unannounced inspection is obliged to select evidence at the premises of the undertaking, and copy only that information which is relevant to the case. The analysed order also confirms the need for the protection of legal professional privilege within antitrust inspections, and creates the grounds for further debate on its possible scope.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Legal Professional Privilege and the Privilege Against Self-Incrimination in EU Competition Law after the Lisbon Treaty – Is It Time for a Substantial Change?

94%
Turno B., Zawłocka-Turno A.
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
|
2012
|
vol. 5(6)
193-214
EN
Is there, in the context of the recent developments related to the Lisbon Treaty, a need for substantial change with respect to the scope and application of legal professional privilege (LPP) and the privilege against self-incrimination (PASI) in competition law proceedings before the European Commission? To answer this question this article first briefly describes the current scope of LPP and PASI in EU competition law enforcement proceedings. This is followed by a presentation of the impact that the binding effect of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (Charter) and the EU’s prospective accession to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Convention) may have on LPP and PASI. This analysis includes reasons why it may be necessary for the Commission and the EU Courts to reconsider the current scope of the privileges, and examines what could be considered as significant changes in this respect. In the event arguments for radical reform do not find the requisite political support, the article elaborates some nuanced improvements which could be implemented.
FR
Dans le contexte des changements récents liés au traité de Lisbonne, est-il nécessaire de procéder à des modifications substantielles par rapport au champ d’application du principe de confidentialité des communications entre avocats et clients (LPP) et du droit de ne pas contribuer à sa propre incrimination (PASI) dans les procédures de concurrence menées par la Commission européenne ? Pour répondre à cette question, le présent article donne d’abord une définition sommaire du champ actuel d’application du principe de confidentialité des communications entre avocats et clients et du droit de ne pas contribuer à sa propre incrimination lors d’une procédure communautaire de concurrence. On présente ensuite l’impact possible que peuvent avoir sur les principes LPP et PASI le caractère juridiquement obligatoire de la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne ainsi que l’adhésion prochaine de l’Union européenne à la Convention de sauvegarde des droits de l’homme et des libertés fondamentales. L’analyse tient compte des causes pour lesquelles il peut se montrer nécessaire que la Commission et les juges communautaires révisent le champ actuel d’application des principes susmentionnés et qu’ils étudient ce qui pourrait être considéré comme une modification substantielle en la matière. Dans une situation où les arguments à l’appui d’un changement radical quant à l’approche de ces principes ne trouveraient pas le soutien politique nécessaire, l’article propose certaines « améliorations » susceptibles de mise en œuvre.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Managing the process of electronic communication in a small legal firm

94%
Dziadkiewicz M., Baskiewicz N.
Informatyka Ekonomiczna
|
2016
|
issue 1(39)
65-74
EN
The purpose of this article is to present the issues related to the management process in the electronic communication of a small law firm. In the introduction, the role of information and knowledge in shaping the competitiveness of enterprises is presented. Then the phenomenon of electronic communication as a process of data transmission is shown, which on the one hand determines the competitive position of economic entities including law firms and legal counsellors, and on the other hand, it is the subject of legal regulations. Because the information provided by electronic means shall be subject to the professional secrecy of legal attorneys or solicitors, as the principle of confidentiality applicable to lawyers according to relevant legislation does not exempt these entities from the responsibility in terms of the protection of personal data. Another area raised in the article is to identify actions to protect information transmitted electronically. The last part of the study is to present the results of studies that show the extent to which we use e-mail, free applications such as Dropbox and Google Drive. Moreover the issues of the frequency of password changing and encryption of media as well as attacks on data owned by an office have been discussed. The whole content has been summarized with conclusions.
4

The Scope of Protection of Legal Professional Privilege in Criminal Proceedings—Selected Issues

83%
Krzyżanowski P.
Roczniki Nauk Prawnych
|
2018
|
vol. 28
|
issue 2 English Online Version
19-36
EN
The chief aim of this study is to explore the essence of legal professional privilege and analyse its scope in criminal proceedings. Legal professional privilege plays an essential role in the criminal process as it guarantees every individual the adequate exercise of his or her right of defence and to a fair trial. It should be stressed that the privilege is not uniform since there is dualism manifested by a distinction between defence lawyer's privilege and advocate's privilege, other than the former. The author discusses the Polish regulations and relevant case law. Also, amendments to the current regulations will be proposed.
5

W kwestii kolizji art. 180 § 2 kodeksu postępowania karnego i art. 6 Prawa o adwokaturze

71%
Mądrecka E.
Nowa kodyfikacja prawa karnego
|
2012
|
vol. 28
147-160
EN
The article analyzes legal professional privilege in the light of provisions of the Advocate’s Profession Act, the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Code of Professional Ethics and Conduct for Advocates. The author raises the question of conflict between Art. 180 § 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which regulates the advocate’s testimonial privilege and its possible waiver by court’s decision, and Art. 6 of the Advocate’s Profession Act, which treats advocate’s privilege as an absolute rule. The article also comments on the views presented in the doctrine and in judicial decisions. In addition, the author provides an interpretation of the legal regulations/norms and discusses the conflict of legal rules between these regulations. For the purpose of comparison, the article also reviews the situation of advocate–witness in civil and administrative procedures. The legal analysis concludes with proposals de lege ferenda.
6
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Ochrona poufności komunikacji z prawnikiem w świetle europejskiego i krajowego prawa ochrony konkurencji

71%
Bundyra A.
Studia Iuridica
|
2018
|
vol. 76
122-137
PL
Legal Professional Privilege is a material procedural safeguard that ensures protection of communication between undertaking and its legal counsel in the competition law. It is essential to differentiate the rules governing European and Polish antitrust proceedings in order to guarantee undertakings the widest possible protection against the search of premises. In each case when the primary aim of administrative regulations is to penalize the entrepreneurs for illegal conduct, it should be assured that at least similar safeguards to these adopted in criminal proceedings are secured.
7
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Tajemnica adwokacka w kontekście ustawy o ochronie danych osobowych

71%
Bielecka K., Brudło K.
Zeszyt Studencki Kół Naukowych Wydziału Prawa i Administracji UAM
|
2015
|
issue 5
25-40
PL
W artykule przedstawiono charakterystykę tajemnicy adwokackiej zarówno na podstawie szczególnych przepisów etyki zawodowej, jak i ustawy o ochronie danych osobowych. Postawiono pytanie, czy ochrona danych osobowych jest elementem składowym konstytucyjnego prawa do prywatności jako dobra osobistego. Problematycznym zagadnieniem staje się kolizyjność norm etycznych z ustawowymi oraz możliwość wyłączenia tych ostatnich. Ponadto rozważano ograniczenia kontroli tych danych osobowych, które objęte są tajemnicą adwokacką. Poruszono też kwestię odpowiedzialności karnej i cywilnej za niezgodne z prawem przetwarzanie danych osobowych, a także odpowiedzialności dyscyplinarnej za postępowanie sprzeczne z zasadami etyki zawodowej. Przywołano poglądy doktryny oraz stanowisko orzecznictwa, aby znaleźć kompromis pomiędzy skrajnymi koncepcjami.
EN
The authors undertake to provide the characteristics of legal professional privilege, both based on the specific rules of professional ethics, as well as the Personal Data Protection Act. The question raised is whether the protection of personal data is a component of constitutional right to privacy as personal interests. The problematic issue becomes a collision of ethical standards with the statutory ones, and the possibility to disable the latter. At the same time the question of limiting control over these personal data which are covered by legal privilege is considered. Moreover, the issue of criminal and civil liability for unlawful processing of personal data, as well as disciplinary liability for the proceedings contrary to the principles of professional ethics is raised. The authors recall the standpoint of doctrine and jurisprudence trying to find a compromise between the extreme concepts.
8

The Protection of Client’s Interests, as Arising from the Right (Requirement) to Rely On Legal Professional Privilege in China, Compared to Polish Solutions – the Development of the System. Part I. A Historical Overview of Polish Solutions (until 1975)

48%
Bednaruk W., Kisiel O.
Roczniki Nauk Prawnych
|
2018
|
vol. 28
|
issue 1
7-16
EN
The protection of a client’s interests in his relationship with a lawyer is an obligation of special importance, especially when we talk about maintaining the professional secrecy, without with a person granting the power of attorney could not have confidence that is necessary for the full use of his procedural rights. In the Polish systemic solutions the model of mutual relationships between the attorney and the client has been shaped for centuries and led to the conception of their bond that was believed to guarantee a wide protection of the rights that a party of proceedings is granted with before all courts. Chinese experiences are completely different, therefore the obligation that is included in the title is understood in a completely different way.
PL
Ochrona interesów klienta w jego relacjach z adwokatem jest obowiązkiem o szczególnym znaczeniu, zwłaszcza gdy mówimy o zachowaniu tajemnicy zawodowej, bez której udzielający pełnomocnictwa nie mógłby zdobyć się na zaufanie konieczne dla pełnego wykorzystania przysługujących mu praw procesowych. W polskich rozwiązaniach ustrojowych model wzajemnych stosunków na linii adwokat-klient kształtował się przez stulecia, prowadząc do takiego rozumienia łączącej ich więzi, która daje rękojmię szerokiej ochrony praw przysługujących stronie w postępowaniu przed wszystkimi sądami. Chińskie doświadczenia są zupełnie odmienne, dlatego też tytułowy obowiązek jest tam pojmowany w zasadniczo różny sposób.
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.