The decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 21st Division of Labour and Social Insurance of 16th October 2019

Written by

  1. Pursuant to Article 24 (2) of the Act of 17 December 2009 on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings (Journal of Laws of 2018, item 573, as amended), the provisions of Article 100 (2), Articles 101-103, 105, 107, and 109-112 of the Act of 28 July 2005 on Court Costs in Civil cases, the exemption of court fees is impossible, neither in whole, nor in part.

The Regional Court in Warsaw 21st Division of Labour and Social Insurance with the following ruling bench:

Court Referendary:        Izabela Król

having examined on 16th October  2019, at a hearing in camera, the case brought forth by R. L. against the State Treasury – the Minister of Interior and Administration for compensation on the claimant’s application for the exemption of court fees,

decides to:

  1. reject the motion.

Justification

Along with the appeal the claimant, as a representative of the group, applied for an exemption of court fees exemption.

The court referendary considered the following:

The application had to be rejected as inadmissible.

It should be noted that pursuant to Article 24(2) of the Act of 17 December 2009 on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings (Journal of Laws of 2018, item 573, as amended), the provisions of Article 100(2), Articles 101-103, 105, 107 and 109-112 of the Act of July 28, 2005 on Court Costs in Civil cases do not apply.

Accordingly the court may not exempt group members from court fees, neither in whole, nor in part.

For these reasons, the court referendary ruled as in the operative part.

Decision of the Regional Court in Poznań 18th Civil Division of 8th October 2019

Written by

The Regional Court in Poznań 18th Civil Division with the following ruling bench:

Presiding judge:         Joanna Ciesielska-Borowiec

Judges:                         Magdalena Ławrynowicz, Adrianna Foligowska

having examined on 8th October 2019 at the hearing in camera of the group action filed by [data of 15 persons] against R. T. Spółka Akcyjna with its registered office in Ł. for payment,

decides to:

  1. discontinue the proceedings,
  2. dismiss the claimant’s motion for refunding half of the court fee paid for the lawsuit.

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 4th Civil Division of 27th September 2019

Written by

The Regional Court in Warsaw 4th Civil Division with the following ruling bench:

Presiding Judge:            Magdalena Kubczak, the Regional Court Judge

Judges:                            Anna Tyrluk-Krajewska, the Regional Court Judge

Tomasz Jaskłowski, the Regional Court Judge

having examined on 27th September 2019 in Warsaw at the hearing in camera the action filed by Ł. K. – a group representative against bank (…) S.A. in W. for the establishment of the defendant’s liability,

hereby decides to:

examine the case in group proceedings.

Decision of the Regional Court in Wroclaw 1st Civil Division of 9th September 2019 I C 976/17

Written by

The decision is not valid and final.

  1. The requirement of homogeneity of claims stipulated in Article 1 Section 1 of Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings means that all persons covered by the class action shall apply for legal protection in the same form.
  2. The pecuniary claims shall undoubtedly be considered as homogeneous claims. The non-pecuniary claims shall be homogeneous solely when they relate to the defendant’s requested course of action, which means that all group members request a specified defendant’s act or omission (of the same kind).
  3. The premise of numerosity shall be fulfilled at the moment of filing the lawsuit as well as at the moment of the Court’s on the admissibility of the group proceedings.
  4. The third subjective premise, stipulated in Article 1 Section 1 of Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings, which shall be fulfilled to initiate group proceedings, is commonality of the factual basis. The commonality arises when a bond between group members based on the unity of the event leading to the damage exists.
  5. Therefore, the identical factual basis exists when there is one multilateral legal relationship, and a similar factual basis – many legal relationships.
  6. The very purpose of allocating the money from a loan for the purchase of a residential premises, its renovation or furnishing eliminates the debtor’s status as an entrepreneur.
  7. Even if the debtor, who concluded the contract for residential purposes, simultaneously runs a business activity, their consumer status does not change in the present proceedings, because the conclusion of the loan (credit) contract is not directly related to that activity.

 

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

Presiding judge:          Rafał Cieszyński, Regional Court Judge

Judges:                          Aneta Fiałkowska-Sobczyk, Regional Court Judge

        Sławomir Urbaniak, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 9th September 2019 in Wroclaw at the hearing in camera the action filed by the Municipal Consumer Ombudsman in (…) W. (a group representative) against (…) Bank (…) S.A. with its registered office in W. for the establishment of the defendant’s liability,

hereby decides to:

examine the case in group proceedings.

The judgement of the Regional Court in Wroclaw published on the website was facilitated by the President of the Regional Court in Wroclaw. The text of the judgement was processed by the entity operating this website by adding the theses, visual compilation and removing punctuation and literal errors. The judgment has been translated by the entity operating this website.

The authority obliged to provide public sector information is not responsible for its processing, further sharing and use.

Judgement of the Regional Court in Warsaw 24th Civil Division of 31st July 2019

Written by

  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.

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 26th Commercial Division on 1st July 2019

Written by

  1. Pursuant to Article 16.1 of Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings the burden of proof that the particular persons are group members of lies with the plaintiff. A detailed name list of group members must be drafted and it have to be proven that each of them meets the requirements on joining the group.

The Regional Court in Warsaw 26th Commercial Division with the following ruling bench:

Presiding Judge:           Karolina Toczyńska, Regional Court Judge

Judges:                            Agnieszka Owczarewicz, Regional Court Judge

Anna Hrycaj, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 1st July 2019 in Warsaw at the hearing in camera the group action filed by T. G. acting as a group representative against (…) spółka z ograniczoną odpowiedzialnością in W., K. A., P. J. (1) for payment,

on the establishment of the group composition,

decides to

establish that the group consists of the following persons:

[data of 142 persons]

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 25th Civil Division of 26th June 2019

Written by

The Regional Court in Warsaw 25th Civil Division with the following ruling bench:

Presiding Judge:            Anna Pogorzelska, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 26th June 2019 in Warsaw at the hearing in camera the group action filed by the Poviat Consumer Ombudsman in Poviat K. against (…) S.A. with its registered office in W. for payment,

decides to:

  1. award (…) Spółka Akcyjna with its registered office in W. the amount of PLN 9,741.60 (nine thousand seven hundred forty one PLN 60/100), as reimbursement of the costs of the publication of the press announcement;
  2. order the cashier of the Regional Court in Warsaw to pay the abovementioned amount to the benefit of (…) Spółka Akcyjna with its registered office in W., temporarily from the State Treasury’s funds.

The Judgement of the Regional Court in Warsaw 21st Division of Labour of 24th June 2019

Written by

  1. The responsibility of the State Treasury under art. 417 § 1 of the Civil Code is based on a tort of public authority – i.e. an unlawful act or omission in the exercise of public authority, the object of which may only be the violation of a specific standard ordering (or prohibiting) specific performance in a given situation. “Unlawfulness” must be understood strictly in accordance with the constitutional depiction of the sources of law (Articles 87-94 of the Polish Constitution). This concept is therefore narrower than the traditional depiction of unlawfulness under civil law which also includes, apart from the violation of legal provisions, the violation of moral and customary standards, defined as “principles of social coexistence” or “good customs”.
  1. The mere fact that the budget act provides for the average annual wage growth rate in the state budget sector in a certain amount does not impose an obligation to increase the remuneration of the employees of the state budget sector. Regulations providing for wage indexation do not create direct subjective rights but only provide guidelines for further action.

The Regional in Warsaw 21st Division of Labor with the following ruling bench:

Presiding Judge:            Grzegorz Kochan, Regional Court Judge

Judges:                             Małgorzata Kosicka, Regional Court Judge

                                           Dorota Czyżewska, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 10th June 2019, at the hearing the case brought by R. L., the representative of the group which includes: (…) against the State Treasury – the Minister of Interior and Administration for compensation,

decides to:

  1. reject the statement of claims,
  2. order R. L. – the representative of the group – to pay the amount of PLN 10.800,00 (ten thousand eight hundred zlotys) to the benefit of the State Treasury – General Counsel to the Republic of Poland as a reimbursement of the costs of legal representation.

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 25th Civil Division of 7th May 2019

Written by

The Regional Court in Warsaw 25th Civil Division with the following ruling bench:

Presiding Judge:            Anna Pogorzelska, Regional Court Judge

Judges:                            Krystyna Stawecka, Regional Court Judge

Anna Ogińska-Łągiewka, District Court Judge (delegated)

having examined on 7th May 2019 in Warsaw at the hearing in camera the group action filed by the Poviat Consumer Ombudsman in Poviat (…) against (…) S.A. with its registered office in W. for payment,

decides to:

  1. vary the point 2 of the decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 25th Civil Division of 11th May 2018, issued in the case to file ref. no XXV C 461/18, regarding the ordering of the announcement on the commencement of the group proceedings, in such a way that determine the following wording of the announcement:

“A class action was initiated by the Poviat Consumer Ombudsman in Poviat (…) against (…) Spółka Akcyjna with its registered office in W. ((…) S.A.), conducted to file ref. no. XXV C 461/18 before the Regional Court in Warsaw 25th Civil Division, under the Act of 17 December 2009 on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings (Journal of Laws of 2010, No. 7, item 44).

The Poviat Consumer Ombudsman in Poviat (…) as a group representative claimed a return of sums equal to value of financial benefits obtained by (…) S.A. for adjudication from the defendant (…) S.A. without legal basis at the expense of the group members, in the performance of invalid legal acts – invalid declarations made by group members to the defendant on the intention to take advantage of the reservation of insurance coverage for them as well as on the basis of invalid group life and endowment insurance contracts with an insurance capital fund (“main claim”).

Alternatively, in the event the abovementioned claim is dismissed, the group representative claims a return of amounts collected by the defendant without legal basis for adjudication from the defendant (…) S.A., on the grounds of abusive contractual clauses stipulating that in the event of resignation from insurance by a group member, (…) S.A. will only pay the so-called redemption value to their benefit, i.e. a part of the funds accumulated on the group member’s account. Moreover, the group representative claimed a return of amounts collected by the defendant for adjudication from (…) S.A. based on abusive contractual clauses without legal grounds as an administrative fee.

Each person who meets all following requirements:

(…)

may join the group by submitting a written declaration of the intent to join the group. Such a declaration should be made within a two-month term as of the date of publication hereof and submitted to the group representative – the Poviat Consumer Ombudsman in the Poviat (…), to the attorneys’ address: legal counsel A. L. or D. K., (…) s.c., ul. (…),(…)-(…) W.

Joining the group after above indicated time is inadmissible.

The declaration on joining the group should be deemed equivalent to granting consent for the Poviat Consumer Ombudsman in Poviat (…) to act as the group representative and for the legal fees payment rules indicated below.

(…)

The final judgement will be binding for all group members, i.e. persons, who will make a declaration on joining the group before the lapse of the abovementioned period, and will be included in the decision on composition of the group”.

Decision of the Regional Court in Katowice 1st Civil Division of 4th April 2019

Written by

  1. The requirement of the same or similar factual basis means that the factual basis of the claim need not consist of identical circumstances but their significant similarity is sufficient.
  2. Admittedly, the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings does not set forth the course and initiative of the establishment of a subgroup, but it is assumed that the decision to establish a subgroup is made by a group representative, who bases on assessment of the claims amount notified by the persons joining the group. Obtaining a group member’s consent to assign them to a particular subgroup (i.e. to standardization of their claims in the subgroup) is not necessary. However, a contract concluded by the group representative and group members may stipulate different rules of creating subgroups, including, in particular, the group representative’s obligation to obtain group members’ prior consent to standardize the amount of their claims and decide which subgroup they belong to.
  3. The court does not participate in the process of creating particular subgroups and cannot specify them, change their numerosity, or influence on their composition. This is because, the court ex officio does not interfere with either the quality or the amount of the claims pursued by the members of the group proceedings – in this respect the principle that the parties delimit the subject matter of the proceedings, set forth in Article 321 of Polish Code of Civil Procedure in connection with Article 24.1 of Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings, applies.
  4. Joining a specified subgroup should be expressly confirmed by a group member, so that a group representative and a court have no doubts which subgroup the group member joined and what kind of standardization is covered by their consent. The confirmation may be expressed in any form (also in form of an oral declaration addressed to a group representative) and need not to be submitted to the court.
  5. The view that spouses should be treated as a two-person subgroup, in which each spouse claims 50% of the value of the jointly pursued claim, is not correct, because the claim belonging to joint co-ownership is indivisible. However, it is correct that one spouse is a group member and acts in the common interest of both of them, with the consent of the second, pursuing a claim that both spouses are entitled to. Then, the spouses’ claim would be standardized with the claim of another group or subgroup member.

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

Presiding judge:             Jolanta Polko, Regional Court Judge

Judges:                            Agata Młynarczyk-Śmieja, Regional Court Judge

Katarzyna Zadora, District Court Judge (delegated; rapporteur)

having examined on 4th April 2019 in Katowice at the hearing in camera the group action filed by J. D. acting as a representative of the group consisting of 33 persons i.e. [data of the group members], who is a group member as well, against (…) Spółka z ograniczoną odpowiedzialnością spółka komandytowa in Ś., for payment,

decides to

examine the case in group proceedings.