Agnieszka Trzaska-Śmieszek
Magdalena OsmędaThe costs of court proceedings, and in particular the lawsuit filing fees, are a key factor determining actual access to the courts, influencing a potential claimant’s decision to pursue legal action.
One of the objectives of group proceedings is to overcome the financial barrier that prevents injured parties from seeking redress in court, as well as to reduce the costs and resources that the judiciary must commit to handling numerous identical or similar cases. Procedural economy is a core purpose (function) of group proceedings.
This objective is reflected in Article 13d of the Act of 28th July 2005 on Court Fees in Civil Cases (Journal of Laws of 2022, item 1125, i.e., as of 27th May 2022; hereinafter: the “Court Fees Act”), in which the legislator introduced a preferential fee rate in “cases concerning pecuniary claims pursued in group proceedings,” stipulating that “the fixed or proportional fee shall amount to half of the fee determined following Articles 13, 13a, and 13b, but not less than 100 PLN and not more than 200,000 PLN.” In group proceedings, the claims of many entities are examined jointly (which results in lower litigation costs), and therefore, the lawsuit filing fee should also be lower.
The fundamental question arises as to whether the preferential lawsuit filing fee rate provided for in Article 13d of the Court Fees Act may also be applied to an individual claim brought by a group member after obtaining a final and binding judgment establishing the defendant’s liability for a specific event or events (see Article 2 Section 3of the Act of 17th December 2009 on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings; Journal of Laws of 2020, item 446, consolidated text as of 16th March 2020 – hereinafter: the “Class Action Act”).
The answer to this question should be affirmative.
First and foremost, Article 13d of the Court Fees Act does not limit its application to a “group claim” or a “claim in group proceedings”, but instead uses the broader term “cases concerning pecuniary rights pursued in group proceedings”. A literal interpretation of Article 13d of the Court Fees Act does not preclude the conclusion that it also applies to an individual claim brought by a group member as a result of group proceedings for establishing liability. After all, such an individual proceeding concerns a case regarding a pecuniary right pursued in group proceedings, constituting the second stage of asserting the claim.
In the case of an action referred to in Article 2 Section 3 of the Class Action Act, the pursuit of a claim (e.g., for damages) takes place in two stages. The first stage is group proceedings, in which the court establishes liability. The second stage is an individual claim for payment brought by a group member, in which the court is bound by the judgment issued in the group proceedings, establishing the basis of liability, and examines only the amount of the claim. In contrast, when a claim for payment is pursued outside of group proceedings, both stages are combined into a single proceeding – the court first examines whether the conditions for liability are met and then determines the amount of damages. In the latter case, a “single” (i.e., full) court fee is charged for the claim.
Therefore, the position that the court fee for a claim for payment filed after a final judgment establishing liability has been issued in group proceedings should be calculated following Article 13d of the Court Fees Act, is supported by the nature and structure of the action for establishment of the liability, which constitutes a specific type of group proceeding.
Although in the situation under discussion the courts must conduct two separate proceedings (instead of one), the court hearing the payment claim after the final judgment establishing the defendants’ liability has a significantly narrower scope of review than the court in a standard proceeding for damages (it only examines the form and amount of the damage). Moreover, the costs of group proceedings are lower than the costs of pursuing aggregated claims in individual lawsuits from the outset.
Such a teleological interpretation of Article 13d of the Court Fees Act is, moreover, the most rational interpretation. Under this approach, the total fee for resolving a case, comprising Stage I (establishing liability) and Stage II (determining the amount of damages), will, in principle, amount to no more than the full fee that would be payable in the absence of group proceedings.
On the other hand, adopting the position that an individual claim filed by a group member (Stage II) is subject to the full court fee would, in many cases, lead to a situation where participation in group proceedings would result in the group member having to bear higher court costs than if the claim had been pursued from the outset solely through an individual lawsuit. In an extreme case, the group member would ultimately pay 1.5 times the standard court fee – half of the fee based on the value of their claim in the group proceeding to establish liability and the full fee in the individual payment claim. This would significantly disadvantage individuals who chose to pursue their claims through group proceedings. These individuals would be in a worse position than those who decided to pursue claims on their own, which is contrary to the purpose of group litigation. Group proceedings are meant to facilitate the pursuit of claims and reduce costs. Therefore, group litigation regulations should encourage, not discourage, claimants from choosing this route to enforce their rights.
In conclusion, the above arguments support the position that an individual claim filed by a group member following a final judgment establishing the defendant’s liability is subject to the reduced court fee provided for in Article 13d of the Court Fees Act. An opposing view – that such an individual claim should be subject to the full fee under general rules (without the preference set out in Article 13d) – would result in a significant disadvantage to group members and would contradict the fundamental assumptions and purposes of group proceedings.
As a side note, it is worth adding that the wording of Article 13d of the Court Fees Act is inconsistent when it comes to the maximum court fee. The provision establishes, as a rule, that the fee in cases involving pecuniary claims pursued in group proceedings amounts to half of the fee determined per the provisions on fixed or proportional fees – however, not less than PLN 100 and not more than PLN 200,000. This means that, concerning the maximum fee, it does not reduce it by half (i.e., to PLN 100,000). De lege ferenda, it would be advisable to amend the provision to set the maximum fee at PLN 100,000.
