Decision of the Court of Appeals in Warsaw, 1st Civil Division of 10th March 2016
I ACz 1586/15

The Court of Appeals in Warsaw, 1st Civil Division in the following ruling bench:

Presiding Judge:                Przemysław Kurzawa, Court of Appeals Judge

Judges:                                Lidia Sularzycka, Court of Appeals Judge, Ewa Kaniok, Court of Appeals Judge

having examined on 10th March 2016 in Warsaw at the hearing in camera the case filed by P.K. against the State Treasury – Minister of Labor and Social Policy for establishment following the complaint of the State Treasury – Minister of Labour and Social Policy and Social Security in W. against the decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw of 4th March 2015, file ref. no. I C 599/14

Decision of the Court of Appeals in Warsaw 6th Civil Division of 30th October 2017
VI ACz 1541/17

  1. Submission of a declaration on joining the group has equal substantive and procedural law related effects as filing an action. However, a condition for upholding the effects of filing an action and representation relationship in force is nevertheless conditioned is to include the members of the group in a decision of the court’ establishing the group’s personal composition. The court renders this decision after permitting the defendant to present their stance in this matter in the form of charges. These charges may therefore pertain to the non-compliance of individual group members with the group membership criteria. The criteria of group membership are determined each time by way of court’s decision on hearing the case in group proceedings. This is because by rendering a decision on hearing a case in group proceedings, the court certifies the admissibility of class action on the basis of the claims included in the statement of claims. By accepting these claims as eligible to be heard in group proceedings, the court simultaneously determines a claim template that will be binding at further assessment of parties joining the case at a later stage, i.e. – whether these claims can be heard in the same group proceedings as the claims initially indicated in the statement of claims. In turn, in establishing group membership, the court examines if group members’ claims are identical with the claim template determined in the decision on hearing the case in group proceedings. It means that each claim individually must comply with the preconditions of admissibility of a class action. The group membership of parties covered by the statement of claims is verified at the stage of adjudicating on admissibility of group proceedings.

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 3rd Civil Division of 10th October 2017
III C 1089/15

The Regional Court in Warsaw 3rd Civil Division in the following ruling bench:

Ewa Jończyk, Regional Court Judge

Agnieszka Matlak, Regional Court Judge

Mariusz Solka, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 10th October 2017 in Warsaw at the hearing in camera the case filed by the Municipal Consumer Ombudsman in O. against Bank (…) S.A. with its registered office in W. for payment,

/on the subject of the announcement on commencement of group proceedings/

decides to:

publish an announcement in the (…) section of the ‘(…)’ daily newspaper on the commencement of the group proceedings with the following content

Decision of the Regional Court in Wrocław 1st Civil Division of 5th October 2017
I C 704/14

  1. The standardization of the claims shall be assessed with respect to pursuing homogenous claims in this sense that the Act sets out the requirement to pursue by all claimant members an action for adjudication, action for declaration or shaping of a legal relation or right.
  2. During the process of interpretation of the term ’homogeneity of claims‘ on the grounds of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings, as well as the terms ’factual basis‘ and ’standardization of claims’, which are not legally defined the main goals of group proceedings shall be taken into consideration.
  3. The premise of homogeneity of claims relates to claims which arise from one type of legal relations. The abovementioned meaning of homogeneity of the claims is not associated with the same legal basis. That is because, pursuant to the Article 1 (1) of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings, the commonality of legal norms which are the basis of the claims is not the premise of admissibility of group proceedings.
  4. The requirement of the same or similar factual basis of the statement of claims means that the factual basis of the claims does not have to consist in the same circumstances but the significant similarity of them is sufficient.
  5. In case of declarations on joining the group, the date of submitting them to the group representative is important, not the date their being signed by the entity who declares the intent to pursue their claim in group proceedings.

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 3rd Civil Division of 2nd October 2017
III C 603/15

  1. A sole entrepreneur or a partner in a civil law partnership (therefore as a natural person) can purchase an object either as an entrepreneur or as a consumer. In such a case the purpose for which the agreement is concluded is the decisive factor.
  2. The potential disposal of the tickets bought by consumers to other people has no influence on the decision whether the claims are based on an equal legal basis.
  3. It is therefore difficult to recognize that the claims of the consumers, who purchased the tickets (admittedly in a special offer including gratuitous services, which are not the object of their claims)cannot be deemed as the claims based on the equal or the same factual basis.

Decision of the Court of Appeals in Warsaw 1st Civil Division of 28th September 2017
I ACz 1254/17

  1. From the point of view of a decision on admissibility of group proceedings (Article 10 of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings), first and foremost, it is important if group proceedings may be conducted in the particular case, so as to eliminate the necessity of conducting a number of individual cases.
  2. The issues connected with establishing the group’s composition and, then, legitimacy of claims do not constitute premises for admissibility of group proceedings. The compositions of the group is established in the context of more extensive procedural material gathered to parties’ initiative in course of the proceedings.

Judgment of the Regional Court in Szczecin, 1st Civil Division of 22nd September 2017
I C 762/12

The Regional Court in Szczecin, 1st Civil Division in the following ruling bench:

Presiding Judge:       Wojciech Machnicki (rapporteur), Regional Court Judge

Judges:                        Katarzyna Krasny, Regional Court Judge; Renata Tarnowska, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 8th September 2017 in Szczecin at a hearing of the case filed by K. P. – the representative of the group composed of the following participants: (…) against the State Treasury – (…) and (…)

Decision of the Court of Appeal in Gdańsk 1st Civil Division of 3rd August 2017
I ACz 58/17

  1. The term “claim” within the meaning of Article 1 of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings means the demand of the statement of claims.

Decision of the Court of Appeals in Wrocław 1st Civil Division of 28th July 2017
I ACz 1524/17

  1. The standardization of claims means that the claims at the identical amount for all group members are pursued in group proceedings. The discrepancies between the value of the claims are admissible exclusively by application of the institution of subgroups: members of the same subgroup pursue claims of identical value, whereas the value of claims may be different in the case of different subgroups.
  2. If the pecuniary claims are pursued in group proceedings, the group members must agree that the due compensation will be determined in a lump sum. It means that the compensation will be standardized and the group members will resign from the possibility of pursuing the claims individually and obtaining satisfaction of the claims within the broader scope.
  3. The consent for the standardization of claims must be expressed by all group members.
  4. The list of the group members with the declarations attached, at the moment of filing it in the court is considered to be a specific type of procedural letter. In case of discrepancies within the list, the court is entitled to request the group representative for correction or refuse to include particular parties in the decision on composition of the group.
  5. The lack of the date on the group member’s declaration of intent to join the group does not affect the credibility of the declaration.

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 16th Commercial Division of 3rd July 2017
XVI GC 352/15

The Regional Court in Warsaw 16th Commercial Division in the following ruling bench:

Presiding Judge:     Maria Zgiet–Zawadzka, Regional Court Judge

Judges:                     Jan Wawrowski, Regional Court Judge, Katarzyna Bartosiewicz, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 3rd July 2017 in Warsaw at the hearing in camera the case filed by (…) and (…) C.A. Ltd in W. against (…) Society (…) joint stock company in W. for compensation

1 2 3 26