The Regional Court in Warsaw 24^th Civil Division in the following ruling bench:

Presiding judge:     Monika Dominiak, Regional Court Judge

Judges:                     Jacek Tyszka, Regional Court Judge

                                   Joanna Szekowska-Krym, District Court Judge (delegated)

having examined on 21^st May 2020 in Warsaw at the hearing the case filed by the Municipal Consumer Ombudsman in S. – the group representative against (…) Towarzystwo Ubezpieczeń na Życie Spółka Akcyjna (…) with its registered office in W. for payment,

decides to:

Court of Appeals in Warsaw 7th Commercial and Intellectual Property Division in the following ruling bench:

Presiding Judge: Arkadiusz Ziarko, Regional Court Judge (del.)

having examined on 22nd September 2021 in Warsaw at the hearing in camera, the case filed by (…) Polska sp. z o.o. in Warsaw against (…) Limited in N. (Cyprus) for the protection of copyrights and related rights in group proceedings

1. It is permissible to submit a declaration of joining the group also before the publication of the notice of commencement of group proceedings. Such a statement may not, however, be made by a group member directly to the court, bypassing the group representative.
2. The mere fact of conducting business activity, even if the address of this activity was to be a real estate paid for with funds obtained from a loan incurred from the defendant, does not prove that the loan agreement was concluded by members of the group as entrepreneurs and not as consumers.
3. The claims asserted in this action are based on the fact that each group member concluded with the defendant a loan agreement consisting of inadmissible contractual clauses. Certain differences in the drafting of the clause itself are irrelevant; the decisive factor should be whether, in each case, it leads to the application of an identical mechanism to all the interested members of the group. Nor does it matter how long the disputed clauses were in force in relation to each group member.
4. The purpose of a class action may only be achieved if, in these proceedings, the issues common to the class predominate the issues relating to the group members’ individual circumstances.

The Court of Appeals in Krakow – 1^st Civil Division with the following ruling bench:

Presiding judge:           Marek Boniecki, Court of Appeals Judge

Judges:                           Grzegorz Krężołek, Court of Appeals Judge

                                        Sławomir Jamróg, Court of Appeals Judge (rapporteur)

having examined on 7 September 2020 in Krakow at the hearing the group action filed by Z. R. acting as the representative of the group consisting of: [data of 25 group members] against the State Treasury – the National Water Management Holding Polish Waters in Warsaw [Państwowe Gospodarstwo Wodne Wody Polskie w Warszawie] (previously the State Treasury – the Director of the Regional Board for Water Management in Krakow) and the Świętokrzyskie Voivodeship for establishment of the defendants’ liability,

The Court of Appeals in Krakow – 1^st Civil Division with the following ruling bench:

Presiding judge:          Marek Boniecki, Court of Appeals Judge

Judges:                          Grzegorz Krężołek, Court of Appeals Judge

                                       Sławomir Jamróg, Court of Appeals Judge (rapporteur)

having examined on 7 September 2020 in Krakow at the hearing the group action filed by Z. R. acting as the representative of the group consisting of: [data of 25 group members] against the State Treasury – the National Water Management Holding Polish Waters in Warsaw [Państwowe Gospodarstwo Wodne Wody Polskie w Warszawie] (previously the State Treasury – the Director of the Regional Board for Water Management in Krakow) and the Świętokrzyskie Voivodeship for establishment of the defendants’ liability,

The Court of Appeals in Łódź 1^st Civil Division with the following ruling bench:

Presiding Judge:           Małgorzata Dzięciołowska, Court of Appeals Judge (rapporteur)

Judges:                            Jacek Pasikowski, Court of Appeals Judge

Jarosław Pawlak, Regional Court Judge (delegated)

having examined on 9^th June 2020 in Łódź at the hearing in camera the group action filed by (…) in W. against (…) Spółka Akcyjna with its registered office in W., for the establishment of the defendant’s liability,

on the plaintiff’s motion of 29^th May 2020 for security, filed after the issuance of a judgement of the Court of Appeals in Łódź of 9^th March 2020, in the case with file ref. no I ACa 80/19, regarding the plaintiff’s complaint against the judgement of the Regional Court in Łódź of 19^th October 2018, file ref. no I C 519/16,

The Regional Court in Warsaw 20^th Commercial Division with the following ruling bench:

Judge:             Łukasz Oleksiuk, District Court Judge (delegated)

having examined on 29^th May 2020 in Warsaw at a hearing in camera the case filed by (…) sp. z o.o. with its registered office in W. against (…) Limited (…) sp. z o.o. in W., against (…) (…) in N. (C.) for the protection of copyrights and related rights in group proceedings,

The Regional Court in Warsaw 4^th Civil Division with the following ruling bench:

Presiding Judge:             Karol Smaga, Regional Court Judge (rapporteur)

Judges:                              Agnieszka Derejczyk, Regional Court Judge

 Tomasz Jaskłowski, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 1^st April 2020 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 composition of the group/

1. Claims based on the same factual basis are claims, the factual basis of which are the same or claims whose relevant factual circumstances are common. The abovementioned “commonality” should be interpreted widely. The requirement of the same or equal factual basis of the claims does not mean that the factual basis of the lawsuit consists of identical circumstances, but their relevant similarity is sufficient.

2. The essence of group proceedings is the gathering of many entities’ claims in one proceeding. Such a cumulation is justified due to the economics of the proceedings and the pointlessness of conducting many similar cases. Group proceedings are to be a special procedural institution to resolve more and more frequent conflicts which a larger number of people are involved in. The function of the proceedings is, among others, increasing the efficiency of examining cases regarding the same legal and factual issues, by including the assessment of these issues in one proceeding. This allows the courts to be relieved from the repeated and time-consuming judgement of analogous issues constituting the premises for many claims submitted by individual group members and eliminates the risk of incompatible judicature on these issues.

3. The object of the group proceedings aimed at the establishment of the defendant’s liability, are the only circumstances common for all group members, not individual circumstances concerning particular group members, which will be examined in subsequent individual proceedings.

1. The assumption that the mere fact that a judge incurred an obligation resulting from the credit agreement of various nature, e.g. in PLN, by definition means that they are not impartial and are obligated to recuse themselves from examining any pending case between the borrowers and the bank, leads to consequences that are contrary to the public interest and detrimental for the justice system.
2. The concept of the defendant’s liability under Article 2.3 of Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings has a specific autonomous meaning, other than in Article 318 of the Polish Code of Civil Procedure, as well as in Article 189 of CCP, which is determined by the purpose and functions of the group proceedings as specific proceedings that should ease and improve the resolving of conflicts.
3. The obligation to repay the amount of a used credit in specified repayment terms is the borrowers’ main performance. A valorization clause affects the amount of such performance. Stipulating such a clause in a contract cannot be deemed to be an action falling within the freedom of contract under Article 353(1) of Polish Civil Code, but gross exceeding the limits of that freedom.
4. The moment relevant to decide whether a particular person is a consumer is the moment of performance of the legal act.
5. The valorization or indexation clause is a main contractual provision. Unlike the currency spread clause, that clause is the essentialia negoti of the examined contracts.
6. A gross violation of the consumer’s interests should be understood as an unjustified disproportion, to the consumer’s disadvantage, between their rights and obligations in a specific contractual relationship. Acting contrary to good practices (in the scope of shaping the content of the contractual relationship) means that the second party (consumer’s contractual partner) creates such contractual clauses which harm the contractual balance between the parties to the relationship.