The Supreme Court in the Civil Chamber, composed of:

Presiding Judge:           SSN Dariusz Dończyk

Judges:                           SSN Grzegorz Misiurek, SSN Karol Weitz (spr.)

after hearing in the Civil Chamber on June 6, 2023, the cassation complaints of the Municipality of […] and the County of […]. In the case involving a claim by K. K. – representing a group of residents: [data 133 persons]

District Court in Szczecin I Civil Division composed of:

Presiding Judge:           SSO Barbara Smolska

Judges:                           SSO Agnieszka Skrzypiec, SSR (del.) Tomasz Cegłowski

after hearing on December 7, 2020 in S. at a closed session the case from the claim of B. D. – representative of the group in group proceedings against the Housing Cooperative (…) in S. for payment

The District Court in Szczecin I Civil Division in the following composition:

Presiding Judge:           SSR (del.) Tomasz Cegłowski

having recognized on September 29, 2020 in S. at a closed session the case of the action of B. D. and others against the Housing Cooperative (…) with headquarters in S. group proceedings on the request of SSO P. M. for exclusion from consideration of the case

District Court in Poznań, 1st Civil Division, in the following composition:

Presiding Judge:           SSO Katarzyna Jelewska-Sterczała

having examined on August 31, 2021 in Poznań at a closed session the case of the action [data 31 persons] against (…) spółka akcyjna with its registered office in P. for determination

District Court in Poznań, 1st Civil Division, in the following composition:

Presiding Judge:           SSO Katarzyna Jelewska-Sterczała

Judges:                            SSO Urszula Jabłońska – Maciaszczyk, SSO Agnieszka Wieczorek

having recognized on November 24, 2020 in Poznań at the hearing the case from the action of J. P. against (…) Spółka Akcyjna with its registered seat in (…) for determination

1. The decision of the court of first instance as to the composition of the group issued in group proceedings may be appealed to the court of second instance (Article 394 of the Code of Civil Procedure in conjunction with Article 24(1) of the Law on Enforcement of Claims in Group Proceedings).
2. In a situation where a given appeal is addressed to a specific court as competent to hear it (court ad quem) through the court that issued the appealed decision (court a quo), the legal issue may be presented to the Supreme Court only by the court to which the appeal is addressed (court ad quem). This may not be the court through which the appeal is brought (court a quo).
3. The court through which the complaint is filed does not have jurisdiction to rule on the admissibility of the appeal filed in connection with the rule adopted as of November 7, 2019 that the court through which the complaint is filed only transfers the case file to the court of second instance (new wording of Article 371 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Article 395 § 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure).
4. In a situation where the law allows a complaint without indicating which court has jurisdiction to hear it, it should be heard by the court of second instance, as this is still a model solution in civil proceedings. The assumption that the cases of complaint provided for by the law, for which a different composition of the court issuing the appealed decision is competent to recognize, should be qualified as deviations from the model construction of the complaint expressed in Article 394 in conjunction with Articles 395-397 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and not a separate type of appeal.

1. Claims of class members shall be based on the same legal basis if they derive from the issuance of the same normative acts and from the same omissions of the defendant.
2. In order to establish the membership of a member in a group, probability is sufficient.
3. Class proceedings, in which the demand for the “determination of liability” of the defendant is formulated, have the character of a special autonomous proceeding. The autonomy of this proceeding is determined primarily by the separate legal regime of the group proceeding, as well as its purpose and legal functions, as it is intended to conclude with a decision that constitutes a specific prejudicature for the resolution of future disputes involving a group of persons in the relevant individual court proceedings or as a result of the conclusion of appropriate settlements between the plaintiffs and the defendant.
4. Group proceedings do not examine the individual circumstances of each class member, as these will be evaluated in any subsequent individual trials. The issuance of a finding judgment in these proceedings concerning a large group of people is aimed only at establishing the defendant’s liability for a specific event. If, on the other hand, there are individual proceedings in which the verdict issued under Article 2(3) of the Law on the Investigation of Claims in Group Proceedings will be a prejudgment, it is only in these proceedings that the individual circumstances will be examined.
5. An action to establish the liability of the defendant in a case for a monetary claim arising out of a tort constituting a single event (Article 2(3) in conjunction with Article 1(1) and 1(2) of the Law on the Investigation of Claims in Class Proceedings) is also permissible in class proceedings when the premise of the occurrence of the damage and its amount depends on the individual factual circumstances of the individual members of the class.
6. The diversity of individual factual circumstances peculiar to individual class members (i.e., related to the occurrence of the damage itself, the exact mechanism of its occurrence and its magnitude) cannot constitute a reason for refusing to hear a lawsuit in class proceedings.

District Court in Opole, 1st Civil Division, in the following composition:

Presiding Judge:           SSO Beata Hetmańczyk

Juudges:                      SO Bogusław Kamiński, SO Izabela Bogusz

after hearing on May 24, 2021 in Opole the case from the action of [data 19 persons] against (…) Sp. z o.o. with its registered office in Opole for payment

District Court in Opole I Civil Division in the following composition:

Presiding Judge:           SSO Beata Hetmańczyk

having examined on April 6, 2022 in Opole at a closed session the case from the action of A.C. – representative of the group and [data 18 persons] against (…) Sp. z o.o. with its registered office in Opole for payment

District Court in Opole, 1st Civil Division, in the following composition:

Presiding Judge:           SSO Beata Hetmańczyk

having recognized on November 4, 2021 in Opole at a closed session the case of the action of [data 19 persons] against (…) Sp. z o.o. with its registered office in Opole for payment