Case law > Decision of the Regional Court in Kielce, 5th Labor and Social Insurance Division, dated 21st September 2023

Decision of the Regional Court in Kielce, 5th Labor and Social Insurance Division, dated 21st September 2023
V P 7/23

  1. It follows from the wording of Articles 1 and 2 of the Act of 17th December 2009 on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings that group proceedings should be understood as civil proceedings in cases in which claims of one type are pursued by at least 10 persons, based on the same or similar factual basis. Only claims for consumer protection, liability for damage caused by a dangerous product, and tort claims can be pursued in group proceedings, with the exception of claims for the protection of personal interests.
  2. Among the fundamental issues of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings is undoubtedly its subject matter scope, which in turn comes down to two problems: 1) the prerequisites for group proceedings (Article 1 Sections 1) and 2) the type of claims that can be pursued in group proceedings (Article 1 Section 2). In this regard, the prerequisites for group proceedings are: the homogeneity of claims, the same or similar factual basis for the claims, and a certain minimum number of ten persons for whose protection is sought. In addition, taking into account the content of Article 2, the prerequisite for the pursuit of monetary claims is their unification within a group or subgroup.
  3. The assessment of whether the prerequisites for the admissibility of group proceedings are met with respect to a particular case is made exclusively by the court during the first phase of the group proceedings – on its admissibility, known in the literature as the certification of group proceedings.
  4. According to the rules contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, the plaintiff is not required to indicate the legal basis of the claim, and can only limit himself to stating the circumstances determining the demand. This is because the choice of an adequate legal norm is up to the court. It is no different in group proceedings, with the provision that the plaintiff must be aware of the limitation contained in Article 1 Section2 of the Act. It results in the fact that in this procedure, the court’s assessment will be limited only to the normative standards listed in Article 1 Section 2 of the Act. As a result, the court should dismiss the claim if the prerequisites of Article 417 of the Civil Code have not been fulfilled (or other provisions of Title VI of the Civil Code), even if even the amount claimed could be awarded under an alternative legal basis (other than those listed in Article 1 Section 2 of the Act). This effect means that compliance with the condition of Article 1 Section 2 of the Act will already occur if a party claims in a lawsuit that it is pursuing a claim derived from a tort. What matters, therefore, is the plaintiff’s declaration itself, and it is irrelevant whether or not this assessment is correct.
  5. The verification procedure under Article 10 Section 1 of the Act must be based on the declaration contained in the lawsuit. This means that the rejection of a group lawsuit is possible only if the initiating party does not refer to any of the legal grounds indicated in Article 1 Section 2 of the Act. In other cases, the case should be referred for substantive consideration, with the reservation that it will focus attention only on the legal grounds listed in the aforementioned provision.
  6. The court, when deciding on the admissibility of the consideration of the case in group proceedings, does not examine whether the defendant actually committed behavior that meets the characteristics of a tort within the meaning of the Civil Code, and thus whether the claims pursued in the lawsuit are a consequence of the defendant’s culpable behavior, but only checks whether the premise in question was indicated in the lawsuit. Leaning into the issue of the validity of the plaintiff’s allegations, as well as the defendant’s arguments, occurs only at the stage of substantive examination of the lawsuit.

The Regional Court in Kielce, 5th Labor and Social Insurance Division, composed of:

Presiding Judge:           Grzegorz Detka, Regional Court Judge

Judges:                            Anna Matysiak, Regional Court Judge;

Ewa Palmowska, Regional Court Judge

having recognized on 21st September 2023 in Kielce the case brought by K. Ł. – representative of the group against the Provincial Hospital (…) in K. for determination hereby decides to:

recognize the case in group proceedings.