Case law > Judgment of the District Court of Warsaw XXV Civil Division dated July 31, 2019

Judgment of the District Court of Warsaw XXV Civil Division dated July 31, 2019
XXV C 250/18

  1. Since the legislator has provided for separate bases of liability for aiding and abetting (benefiting from the damage caused by another person), it means that the act of the helper (benefiting from the damage) has been taken out of the general regulation of liability for one’s own act, provided for in Articles 415 and 416 of the Civil Code.
  2. In accordance with the model adopted by the Polish legislator in the provision of Article 361 of the Civil Code, the perpetrator of the damage is liable only for the normal, and not for all, consequences of an act or omission, whereby “the normal consequences of an act or omission are considered to be those that usually occur under the circumstances.”
  3. Aider liability is merely derivative of the liability of the wrongdoer. Therefore, the basic condition for accepting liability for aiding and abetting is to show that the tort liability of the principal perpetrator is justified.
  4. It follows from the very construction of the liability of an aider that in order to be “aiding and abetting to cause damage” one must include with consciousness the tortious act in the commission of which the aider would participate. If there is no willfulness understood in this way, any acts or omissions of the helper are only an element of the facts leading to the damage, but are not acts to which the legal system attaches liability for damages.
  5. The professional duty of banks to act with special care relates to the protection of funds entrusted to the bank by the account holder, and inherently involves contractual liability.

District Court in Warsaw XXV Civil Division composed of:

Presiding Judge:           SSO Krystyna Stawecka

Judges:                           SSO Anna Blażejczyk, SSO Tomasz Gal

after hearing on July 17, 2019 in Warsaw a case brought by K. P. acting as a representative of the class against (…) Bank (…) S.A. W. for payment,

  1. dismisses the action;
  2. leaves the decision on the costs of the trial to the court registrar, indicating that the defendant won the case in 100%.