Judgement of the Regional Court in Warsaw 24th Civil Division of 31st July 2019
XXV C 148/14

  1. Since the Polish legislator provides for autonomous grounds of liability resulting from assistance in inflicting damage (taking benefit from the damage inflicted by another person), it means that the ancillary’s action (who benefits from the damage) is not covered by the general regulation of liability for its own act stipulated in Articles 415 and 416 of the Polish Civil Code.
  2. Pursuant to the model set forth in Article 361 of the Polish Civil Code by the Polish legislator, a perpetrator of damage bears liability only for usual, not all, results of their acts or omissions. The usual results of the acts or omissions are such actions or omissions which usually happen in particular circumstances.
  3. The ancillary’s liability derives from the liability borne by the perpetrator of damage. Hence, the essential condition of liability resulting from assistance in inflicting damage is proving that the perpetrator’s tort liability is justified.
  4. It follows from the very construction of the ancillary’s liability that in order to be “helpful to inflict damage” one should be aware of the tort which the ancillary would participate in. If there is no such awareness, any ancillary’s actions or omissions are merely an elements of the facts leading to the occurrence of damage, but they are not acts which resulted in liability for damages.
  5. A bank’s professional duty to act with special diligence relates to the protection of funds entrusted to the bank by a bank account holder and, in its nature, is related to contractual liability.

 

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

Presiding Judge:            Krystyna Stawecka, the Regional Court Judge

Judges:                            Anna Błażejczyk, the Regional Court Judge

                               Tomasz Gal, the Regional Court Judge

having examined on 17th July 2019 in Warsaw at the hearing the action filed by K. P. acting as a group representative against (…) Bank (…) S.A. in W. for payment,

hereby decides to:

  1. dismiss the claim;
  2. leave the decision on the costs of the proceedings to the court referendary, indicating that the defendant won the case in full.