Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 3rd Civil Division of 27th April 2015

Written by

  1. Article 19 of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings provides that the withdrawal of the statement of claims, waiver, or limitation of a claim as well as the conclusion of a settlement require the consent of more than half of the number of the group members. The court may find the withdrawal of the statement of claims, waiver, or limitation of a claim as well as the conclusion of a settlement inadmissible if the circumstances of the case indicate that the above-mentioned actions contradict the law or good practice or are aimed at circumventing the law or grossly violating the interest of members of the group.
  2. The withdrawal of the statement of claims in the present case was effective due to the fact that it was withdrawn by more than a half of the members of the group to have submitted written declarations in this regard. The circumstances of the case, and particularly the satisfaction by the defendant of the group members’ claims do not indicate that the withdrawal of the statement of claims contradicted the law or aimed at circumventing the law, i.e. that there were no prerequisites from Article 203.4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and that the withdrawal stood in contradiction with good practice or grossly violated the interest of members of the group, hence, no prerequisites from Article 19.2 of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings existed that would give the Court a possibility to find the withdrawal of the statement of claims inadmissible.
  3. The parties in group proceedings are the claimant – the group representative – and the defendant. The burden of generating funds required to initiate a group action rests with the representative (Article 2.2 of the Act on Court Costs in Civil Cases). The Act does not indicate sources of financing, leaving these issues to the representative and the group’s internal organisation. In consequence, the costs are awarded, depending on the outcome of the trial, from the defendant to the claimant – the representative of the group. The Act does not stipulate encumbering individual members of the group with the costs of the proceedings. Members of the group adopt the position characteristic of a party in the substantive but not the formal meaning, and they do not participate in the proceedings on the principle characteristic of a multi-entity party to the proceedings. Thus, the costs of the proceedings are awarded from or to the representative of the group, while not individual group members.

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 25th Civil Division of 2nd April 2015

Written by

  1. The notion of the “claim”, used in Article 1 of the Act of 17 December 2009 on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings appears there in the meaning of a procedural demand. It does not occur in the substantive law meaning, by which one should exclusively understand the possibility of demanding a certain person to act in a specific manner.
  2. We are dealing with an equal (similar) factual basis of claims if many similar factual events occur (similarity of events). This situation may not be reduced only to an assessment whether factual circumstances common for the entire group dominate individual circumstances pertaining to individual members of the group.
  3. Factual circumstances substantiating claims pursued within the frames of group proceedings may fulfil premises of various provisions of civil law, since in relation to the preconditions of group proceedings, there is no requirement for a legal relationship between the claims raised to exist. Various legal bases of tortious liability do not constitute an obstacle in allowing the case to be heard in group proceedings.
  4. The possibility of standardising the value of pecuniary claims in subgroups is a necessary solution for a situation, in which the legal basis of the claims pursued by members of the group are different, which simultaneously may (but does not have to) entail differences in the value of the demanded amount.
  5. It is inadmissible at the stage of the preliminary examination of the admissibility of hearing the case for the court to relate directly to the assessment of content-related prerequisites of the action and engage in evaluative considerations concerning, for example, circumstances substantiating the existence and type of the causal link between the damage and the defendant’s conduct. Verification of the circumstances provided in the substantiation of the statement of claims that justify the allowing of the claim is the object of evidentiary proceedings at the stage of content-related examination of the case.
  6. An excessively narrow interpretation of provisions of the Act of 17 December 2009 on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings, leading to the elimination of its applicability to claims for which it was created, is obviously inadmissible.

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 24th Civil Division of 2nd April 2015

Written by

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

Presiding Judge: Paweł Pyzio, Regional Court Judge

Judges: Agnieszka Bedyńska-Abramczyk, Regional Court Judge, Jacek Tyszka, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 2nd April 2015 in Warsaw the case filed by the District Consumer Ombudsman (…) against (…) joint stock company with the registered office in W. for payment,

decides to:

  1. reverse the decision of 5th March 2015;
  2. order the following announcement in the (…) daily:

’ANNOUNCEMENT ON COMMENCEMENT OF GROUP PROCEEDINGS

Under the Act of 17th December 2009 on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings, the proceedings  are pending before the Regional Court in Warsaw, 24th Civil Division. The case was initiated by the Poviat Consumer Ombudsman in the Poviat of (…) against (…) joint stock company in W., file ref. no. XXIV C 554/14. Currently, the action is participated in by 28 members of the group whereas the value of the dispute amounts to PLN 470,435.69 .

The Poviat Consumer Ombudsman in the Poviat of (…) as the group representative filed a statement of claims on behalf of group members against (…) joint stock company with registered office in W. for the return by the Defendant of the amounts collected thereby from the group members on the basis of unlawful contractual clauses in life insurance contracts with the capital insurance fund with statutory interests accrued as of 8th May 2014 until the date of payment.

(…)’

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 25th Civil Division of 9th March 2015

Written by

The decision was reversed in part (in the scope of points 1 and 4) by the decision of the Court of Appeals in Warsaw 6th Civil Division of 7th September 2015, VI ACz 1012/15.

  1. We are dealing with “the same” (identical) factual basis of the pursued claims when the identicalness of factual circumstances takes place and the legal protection is pursued by the participants of one event, meaning that there is a link based on the fact that the same event caused the damage. The notion of “factual basis” should be understood as a specified set of factual status elements which is invoked in order to prove the claims.
  2. The same factual basis of the claims occurs when obtaining legal protection is connected with an identical situation or event. In turn, the same factual basis is spoken of when claims are derived only from similar situations and events, which corresponds with the notion of the similar (equal) factual basis being an element of formal joint participation in civil proceedings.
  3. We are dealing with “equal” factual basis when many similar factual events take place. The basic set of facts constituting the basis for the occurrence of the disputed legal relationship and a specific claim must be analogous. Slight differences between individual bases of claims may exist, however, the relevant factual circumstances must substantiate a demand common for all the claims.
  4. The substance of group proceedings is the commonality manifested in the demand which must be typical (common) for all the claims, and is derived from the same legal or factual situation of all members of the group. On the one hand the legislator does not require the identicalness of all of the factual elements, as this would highly narrow the scope of the application of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings, however, on the other hand, the group proceedings would not fulfill their objective – improvement in the effectiveness of proceedings in cases characterized by a significant level of the individuality of the facts and the characteristics of the individual group members. Group proceedings fulfill their role when we are dealing with “typicalness” or “representativeness” of the claim towards all of the group members. The condition of “typicalness” is fulfilled when a legal or factual situation of the group members is equal. Of course, slight differences can exist between the individual grounds of the claims, however, it is necessary for the material factual circumstances to substantiate the common request for all of the claims.
  5. Raising alternative claims in group proceedings leads to a situation where the court determines whether each of the raised claims is common for all members of the group; otherwise, the guiding goal of the group proceedings would be forfeited, whereas the proceedings themselves would be reduced to deciding on various claims of 10 people (members of the group) against one defendant.
  6. In the case of the definition included in Article 221 of the Civil Code, the linguistic interpretation fails; hence, this provision must be interpreted by means of a systemic and teleological interpretation. In the light of the definition of the “economic activity” it must be assumed that the fundamental condition of attributing a given act in law the characteristic of “being related to the conducted economic activity” is for this act to be taken by the entity performing it in order to achieve an profit making objective. The moment decisive for the recognition of a given natural person as a consumer, is the moment of performance of the act in law.
  7. In group proceedings, a statement of claims is treated as a whole and rejecting it only in relation to certain members of the group is not possible.

The decision was reversed by the decision of the Court of Appeals in Warsaw of 7th September 2015, file ref. no. VI ACz 1012/15.

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 24th Civil Division of 5th March 2015

Written by

The decision was reversed by the decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 24th Civil Division dated 2nd April 2015, file ref. no. XXIV C 554/14.

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

Presiding Judge:         Paweł Pyzio, Regional Court Judge

Judges:                         Agnieszka Bedyńska,  Regional Court Judge, Jacek Tyszka, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 5th March 2015 in Warsaw the case filed by the Poviat Consumer Ombudsman (…) against (…) joint stock company with the registered office in W. for payment,

decides to

  1. order the following announcement in newspaper (…):
  2. ’ANNOUNCEMENT ON COMMENCEMENT OF GROUP PROCEEDINGS
  3. Under the Act of 17th December 2009 on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings, the proceedings are pending before the Regional Court in Warsaw, 24th Civil Division. The case was initiated by the Poviat Consumer Ombudsman in the Poviat of (…) against (…) joint stock company in W., file ref. no. XXIV C 554/14. Currently, the action is participated in by 28 members of the group whereas the value of the dispute amounts to PLN 470,435.69 .
  4. The Poviat Consumer Ombudsman in the Poviat of (…) as the group representative filed a statement of claims on behalf of group members against (…) joint stock company with registered office in W. for the return by the Defendant of the amounts collected thereby from the group members on the basis of unlawful contractual clauses in life insurance contracts with the capital insurance fund with statutory interests accrued as of 8th May 2014 until the date of payment.

(…)’

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 1st Civil Division of 4th March 2015

Written by

  1. Fulfilling the precondition of the homogeneity of claims pursued by members of the group in principle requires all claimants (members of the group) to request the granting of legal protection in the same form, and therefore it requires all claimants to raise the same demand. Thus, it is fitting to draw attention to the fact that in the assessment of the Court of Appeals in this composition, homogeneity of claims mentioned in Article 1.1 of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings undoubtedly refers to procedural claims whereas not to substantive law claims. The legislator did not at all make the possibility of pursuing a claim in group proceedings dependent on its being based on the same substantive law basis.
  2. The legislator did not rule out a possibility of pursuing more than one claim in group proceedings. Therefore, in this situation, the appropriate application of Article 191 of the Code of Civil Procedure in such proceedings must be recognised as admissible.
  3. The legislator’s unquestionable intention was to facilitate (and not render more difficult) pursuing claims by consumers or parties who sustained damage in connection with a hazardous product or tort. Thus, the interpretation of the provisions of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings should be carried out in such a manner as to render pursuing such claims easier for group members.

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 3rd Civil Division of 17th February 2015

Written by

  1. Members of a housing association are consumers in the scope of the legal relations between them and the housing association resulting from agreements and bylaws containing illicit contract clauses.
  2. In spite of the fact that only one of the spouses made payments, the other of them is entitled to demand a return of interests on the paid amounts of valorization or a return of penal interests on unduly collected performance (valorization amounts).
  3. The housing association cannot refuse to admit a purchaser of the expectancy right to ownership of a separate residential unit as a member to the housing association.

The Regional Court in Warsaw, 3rd Civil Division in the following ruling bench:

The Chairman:                          Mariusz Solka, Regional Court Judge (rapporteur)

The Judges:                               Agnieszka Rafałko, Regional Court Judge, Ewa Jończyk, District Court Judge (delegated)

having examined on 17th February 2015 at the hearing in camera the case filed by the Municipal Consumer Ombudsman (…) – the representative of the group and of the members of the group:

subgroup no. I: [2 members];

subgroup no. 2: [6 members];

subgroup no. 3: [3 members];

subgroup no. 4: [6 members];

subgroup no. 5: [6 members];

subgroup no. 6: [2 members];

subgroup no. 7: [4 members];

subgroup no. 8: [3 members];

subgroup no. 9: [2 members];

subgroup no. 10: [4 members];

against the Housing Association (…) in W. for payment in re of establishing the composition of the group pursuant to Article 17 (1) of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings,

decides to:

under Article 17 (1) of the Act of 17 December 2009 on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings, establish the composition of the group represented by the Municipal Consumer Ombudsman as follows:

1) subgroup no. I: [2 members];

2) subgroup no. 2: [6 members];

3) subgroup no. 3: [3 members];

4) subgroup no. 4: [6 members];

5) subgroup no. 5: [6 members];

6) subgroup no. 6: [2 members];

7) subgroup no. 7: [4 members];

8) subgroup no. 8: [3 members];

9) subgroup no. 9: [2 members];

10) subgroup no. 10: [4 members].

Decision of the Regional Court in Wrocław 1st Civil Division of 14th January 2015

Written by

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

Izabela Baca, Regional Court Judge

Piotr Jarmundowicz, Regional Court Judge

Krzysztof Rudnicki, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 14th January 2015 in Wrocław at the hearing in camera in the class action filed by E. S. acting as a group representative against (…) Bank (…) S.A. in W. for payment,

hereby decides to:

order the announcement on the commencement of group proceedings.

The judgements of the Regional Court in Wroclaw published on the website were facilitated by the President of the District Court in Wroclaw in the letter of 27th August 2019. The texts of the judgements were processed by the entity operating this website by adding theses, visual compilation and removing punctuation and literal errors. The judgements have 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.

The decision of the Regional Court in Wrocław 1st Civil Division of 7th January 2015

Written by

The Regional Court in Wrocław 1st Civil Division in the following ruling bench

Presiding Judge:   Aneta Fiałkowska-Sobczyk, Regional Court Judge

Judges:                  Sławomir Urbaniak, Regional Court Judge,  Marcin Śmigiel, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 7th January 2015 in Wrocław at the hearing in camera the case filed by (…) against (…) limited liability company (…) (…)  limited joint-stock partnership with its registered office in W. for payment

hereby decides to:

determine that the group in the case includes: [23 group members].

The judgements of the Regional Court in Wroclaw published on the website were facilitated by the President of the District Court in Wroclaw in letter of 27th August 2019. The texts of the judgements were processed by the entity operating this website by adding theses, visual compilation and removing punctuation and literal errors. The judgements have 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.

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 1st Civil Division of 17th December 2014

Written by

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

Presiding Judge: Grzegorz Tyliński, Regional Court Judge,  Bożena Chłopecka, Regional Court Judge, Ewa Ligoń-Krawczyk, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 17th December 2014 in Warsaw at a hearing the case filed by P.K. against the State Treasury – the Minister for Labour, Employment and Social Policy, and against the Social Insurance Institution in W., (…) Ltd in W., (…) Ltd in W., (…) Ltd in W., (…) Ltd in W. in liquidation, (…) Ltd in W., (…) Ltd in W., (…) Ltd in W. for determination

hereby decides to:

  1. discontinue the proceedings in part – against (…) Ltd in W. in liquidation;
  2. dismiss the motion to obligate the Claimant to submit a deposit for securing the costs of the proceedings.