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

Results found: 3

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
PL
E-forms for General Partnership and Limited PartnershipAgreements in Polish LawSummarySince the latest amendment of the Polish Code of Commercial Partnerships and Companies (CCPC) entered into force on 15th January2015 it has been possible to set up a general partnership or a limitedpartnership using a standardised electronic form for the agreement. Thearticle contains an analysis of the new regulations. Though the idea touse electronic communication in setting up partnerships is a welcomemeasure, there is no doubt that it would have been better if the forms forgeneral partnership and limited partnership agreements were annexeso the CCPC instead of annexes to regulations issued by the Ministerof Justice. Moreover, some of the arrangements in these forms call forcriticism. The provisions in e-forms should be no different from those inhe CCPC. The regulations in the e-forms for partnership of indefiniteduration or for method of representation of partnership should be amended. Partners should also be given more freedom in some other issues,e.g. in determining how they are to participate in the allocation of loss.
EN
The inspiration for this article came from the Court of Justice of the European Union judgment in case C-146/20 Azurair et al. Punctuality is extremely important in public transport. Problems arise not only when buses or trains are delayed, but also when they leave too early. Among the regulations aimed at ensuring punctuality is – in addition to European Union regulations – also Article 62(1) of the Polish Transport Law. This study aims at discussing prerequisites for liability to a passenger for the early departure of means of public transport. Amongst other things, the following questions are taken into consideration: with whom does the passenger conclude the contract and from whom can he claim compensation? can compensation be claimed by a person legally entitled to free travel (100% discount)? can compensation be claimed by a passenger who was in time for departure (albeit early)? The conclusion of this analysis is that, although compensation under Article 62(1) of the Polish Transport Law is rarely claimed in practice, it is a necessary provision. It guarantees those few passengers who have suffered damage as a result of the early departure of the means of transport (and are able to prove this damage) the right to full compensation.
PL
Inspiracją do napisania tego artykułu był wyrok Trybunału Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej w sprawie C-146/20 Azurair i in. Punktualność jest niezwykle ważna w publicznym transporcie zbiorowym. Problemy pojawiają się nie tylko, gdy autobusy czy pociągi opóźniają się, ale także gdy odjeżdżają za wcześnie. Wśród regulacji mających na celu zapewnienie punktualności jest – obok regulacji Unii Europejskiej – także art. 62 ust. 1 polskiego Prawa przewozowego. Przedmiotem niniejszego opracowania są przesłanki odpowiedzialności wobec pasażera za przedwczesny odjazd środka transportu publicznego. Rozważania dotyczą m.in. następujących kwestii: z kim pasażer zawiera umowę i od kogo może domagać się odszkodowania? czy odszkodowania może domagać się osoba uprawniona ustawowo do bezpłatnych przejazdów (100% ulgi)? czy odszkodowania może domagać się pasażer, który zdążył na odjazd (choć był on przedwczesny)? Na podstawie przeprowadzonej analizy wysnuto wniosek, że choć w praktyce rzadko dochodzone jest odszkodowanie na podstawie art. 62 ust. 1 pr. przew., to – wbrew przeciwstawnemu poglądowi przedstawionemu w doktrynie – jest to przepis potrzebny. Gwarantuje on tym nielicznym pasażerom, którzy ponieśli szkodę w wyniku przedwczesnego odjazdu środka transportowego (i są w stanie tę szkodę wykazać), prawo do pełnego odszkodowania.
PL
SOME REMARKS ON THE APPOINTMENT OF COMPANY DIRECTORS Summary The article discusses selected issues concerning the appointment of company directors. In the first part the focus is on the practical application of Art. 18 of the Polish Code of Commercial Companies (Kodeks spółek handlowych, KSH), which provides that only natural persons having full legal capacity and not convicted for crimes or offences mentioned in that provision can be members of a company’s board of managers. In the light of the inconsistent rulings handed down by the Polish Supreme Court (Sąd Najwyższy) it is not clear whether the registering court, which has information available from the National Criminal Register (Krajowy Rejestr Skazanych), may refuse to enter a resolution which has been passed at a shareholders’ meeting but is in breach of the law. In my opinion, the first premise in the ruling handed down by seven Supreme Court judges on 18 September 2013 (case III CZP 13/13) is flawed. Not only does it contradict the Supreme Court decision of 24 July 2013 (case III CNP 1/13), but also its consequences can hardly be reconciled with the consequences of the second premise. In the second part of the study I use the provision on the composition of a brokerage board to show that specific regulations may prove ineffective if they only give cursory attention to an issue, with no reference to what is stipulated by the KSH.
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.