If you have a court judgment regarding a class action that was not included in our database, we kindly ask you to send a copy through the contact form available here, or via post to the following address: "Kubas Kos Gałkowski Adwokaci sp. p.” sp. k., ul. Rakowicka 7, 31-511 Kraków. Before including the sent judgments in our database, we will anonymise them (remove any personal information). We also invite you send your publications regarding class actions, we will include them in the section entitled: bibliography.


Please enter your e-mail address in order to receive information on the latest judgments, publications and news regarding class actions.

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.

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

Radosław Nawrocki, Regional Court Judge

Marcin Śmigiel, Regional Court Judge

Iwona Wysocka, District Court Judge

having examined on 5th October 2017 in Wrocław at the hearing in camera the case filed by E. S. acting as a group representative against (…) Bank (…) S.A. in W. for payment,

hereby decides to:

establish, on the grounds of the Article 17.1 of the Act of 17 December 2009 on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings, that the group consists of the following persons:

1) within the subgroup A: [6 members];

2) within the subgroup B: [4 members];

3) within the subgroup C: [4 members];

4) within the subgroup D: [8 members];

5) within the subgroup E: [2 members];

6) within the subgroup F: [4 members];

7) within the subgroup G: [3 members];

8) within the subgroup H: [2 members];

9) within the subgroup I: [3 members];

10) within the subgroup J: [3 members];

11) within the subgroup K: [2 members];

12) within the subgroup L: [3 members];

13) within the subgroup M: [5 members];

14) within the subgroup N: [3 members];

15) within the subgroup O: [2 members].

Go back to case law search

COOKIE INFO: This site is using cookies. learn moreclose