Decision of the Regional Court in Krakow 1st Civil Division of 20th April 2017

Written by

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

Presiding judge:            Marta Woźniak, Regional Court Judge

Judges:                            Agnieszka Włodyga, Regional Court Judge

                                         Ewa Olszewska, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 20th April 2017 in Krakow at the hearing the group action filed by Z. R. acting as the representative of the group consisting of: [data of 27 group members] against the State Treasury – Voivode Ś., Director of the Regional Board for Water Management in K.; the Ś. Voivodeship; the Poviat of S.; the Municipality of S., for establishment,

decides to:

change point 1 of the decision of the Regional Court in Krakow 1st Civil Division of 6 September 2013 by determining that M. S. is excluded from the composition of the group.

Judgment of the Regional Court in Katowice 2nd Civil Division of 12th April 2017

Written by

  1. Under Article 4 (1) of the Polish Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings, the representative of the group is the person filing the action. Thus, the representative of the group, who filed the action on behalf of the group members, is a claimant in the procedural meaning, whereas the group members are claimants in the substantive meaning.
  2. Under Article 17 (1) of the Polish Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings, the Court issues a decision on composition of the group. The doctrine indicates that decision on the composition of the group is of a constitutive nature. Thus the membership in the group is not created by declarations on joining the group submitted by individuals, but by the issuance of the Court’s decision on the composition of the group’ establishes its composition in a class action.
  3. There is no need to examine the claim of a group member who passed away before the decision establishing the group composition was rendered.
  4. It seems admissible to broaden the demand of the statement of claims by claims of further persons, because it does not obligate the Court to establish the group membership anew. As a result of such broadening, the already validly established composition of the group is not changed.
  5. The pursuit of a cash claim on the basis of Article 2 (3) shall be broken down into two stages: the first one as a class action for establishment and the second as individual actions for payment.
  6. It should be emphasized that when only demanding the establishing of the defendant’s liability under Article 2 (3) of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings, the claimant also needs to formulate a cash claim, the pursuing of which in later individual proceedings is aimed at determining defendant’s liability and this liability in group proceedings must be established in reference to a cash claim the performance of which group members seek from the defendant.

Judgment of the Regional Court in Katowice 2nd Civil Division in the following ruling bench:

Presiding Judge: Agata Stankiewicz-Rataj, Regional Court Judge

Judges: Anna Bogaczyk-Żyłka, Regional Court Judge, Lech Skórski, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 12th April 2017 in Katowice at a hearing the case filed by M. G. – the group representative, also acting for members of the group: (…) against Housing Cooperative (…) in B. for the establishment of the invalidity of the agreements and for payment

hereby decides to:

  1. dismiss the action
  2. abstain from charging the claimant with the obligation to reimburse the defendant for the costs of proceedings.

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 1st Civil Division of 15th March 2017

Written by

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

Andrzej Kuryłek, Regional Court Judge

Alicja Fronczyk, Regional Court Judge

Jacek Bajak, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 15th March 2017 in Warsaw at the hearing the case filed by the Municipal  Consumer Ombudsman in O. against Bank (…) S.A. with its registered office in W. for the establishment [of the defendant’s liability]

decides to:

examine the case in group proceedings.

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 25th Civil Division dated 7th March 2017

Written by

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

Presiding Judge: Sylwia J. Łuczak, Regional Court Judge

Judges: Anna Błażejczyk Regional Court Judge; Tomasz Gal Regional Court Judge

having examined on 7th March 2017 in Warsaw at the hearing in group proceedings of the case filed by the Municipal Consumer Ombudsman in City Hall S. (representative of the group) against (…) joint stock company with the registered office in W. for payment or, potentially, for establishment of a legal relation or right,

decides to:

  1. Under Article 11(1) of the Act of 17th December 2009 on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings to order a single publication of an announcement on the commencement of group proceedings with the content as follows:

“The group proceedings initiated by the statement of claims filed by the Municipal Consumer Ombudsman in City Hall S. (…) against (…) joint stock company with its registered office in W., file ref. no. XXV C 915/14 are pending before the Regional Court in Warsaw 25th Civil Division

The Municipal Consumer Ombudsman in City Hall S. as the group representative motions for:

1) ordering the Defendant – (…) joint stock company, to return the amounts collected from the group members without a legal basis as a liquidation fee on the grounds of unlawful clauses included in the life insurance contracts with insurance capital funds, concluded between the members of the group and the Defendant.

2) alternatively, a declaration that the Defendant – (…) joint stock company is liable towards the group members on the grounds of unjust enrichment due to the fact that members of the group performed invalid life insurance contracts with insurance capital funds. (…)

  1. The above-indicated announcement shall be published in the Rzeczpospolita national daily in the announcement and tenders section, in black font 32 (4×8) 165 mm x 329.6mm.

Decision of the Court of Appeals in Warsaw 6th Civil Division of 16th February 2017

Written by

  1. The examination of the case in the group proceedings is allowed only after cumulative satisfaction of the premises of such proceedings, including: homogeneity of the group members’ claims, equal or identical factual basis of the group members’ claims, number of the group members, standardization of pecuniary claims, subjective capacity of the claims to be examined in group proceedings.
  2. The requirement of the same factual basis does not mean that all factual circumstances must be identical with respect to each member of the group, because always, even in the case of the same factual basis, there are individual circumstances which refer to particular group members. The factual basis of the claim consists in facts which substantiate the claimant’s demand, therefore, that basis must include facts primarily substantiating the legal relations which are the subject of the statement of claims.

The Court of Appeals in Warsaw 6th Civil Division in the following ruling bench:

Marek Kolasiński, Court of Appeals Judge

Mariusz Łodko, Court of Appeals Judge

Magdalena Sajur-Kordula, Court of Appeals Judge

having examined on 16th February 2017 in Warsaw at the hearing in camera the case filed by the Municipal Consumer Ombudsman in O. against Bank (…) S.A. in W. for payment, following the defendant’s complaint against the decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw of 13th  September 2016, case file no. III C 1089/15,

decides to:

dismiss the complaint.

 

The decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 3rd Civil Division dated 24th January 2017

Written by

  1. Re-tendering by the defendant on the grounds of Article 15 of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings a claim regarding membership of specific members of the group or subgroups, the same claims having been previously considered by the Court of Appeals following an appeal against the Regional Court’s decision on rejecting the action rendered as a result of these claims, which the Court of Appeals did not eventually deem legitimate, is entirely unjustified, due to which the said Court passed the case to be heard in group proceedigns.

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

Presiding Judge:       Grzegorz Chmiel, Regional Court Judge

Judges:                       Joanna Bitner, Regional Court Judge, Ewa Jończyk, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 24th January 2017 in W. at the hearing in camera the case filed by K.K. – the representative of the group and members of the group:

subgroup no. I: [3 group members];

subgroup no. II: [3 group members];

subgroup no. III: [4 group members];

subgroup no. IV: [2 group members];

subgroup no. V: [3 group members];

subgroup no. VI: [3 group members];

subgroup no. VII: [3 group members];

subgroup no. VIII: [3 group members];

subgroup no. IX: [3 group members];

subgroup no. X: [2 group members];

subgroup no. XI: [2 group members]

against the Housing Association (…) with the registered office in W.

for payment

on re-establishing membership of the group under Article 17 (1) of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings

hereby decides to:

on the grounds of Article 17 (1) of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings to establish the following membership of the group:

1. subgroup no. I with the following members – [3 group members];

2. subgroup no. II with the following members – [3 group members];

3. subgroup no. III with the following members – [4 group members];

4. subgroup no. IV with the following members – [2 group members];

5. subgroup no. V with the following members – [3 group members];

6. subgroup no. VI with the following members – [3 group members];

7. subgroup no. VII with the following members – [3 group members];

8. subgroup no. VIII with the following members – [3 group members];

9. subgroup no. IX with the following members – [3 group members];

10. subgroup no. X with the following members – [2 group members];

11. subgroup no. XI with the following members – [2 group members].

Decision of the Regional Court in Wrocław 1st Civil Division of 21st December 2016

Written by

  1. The declaration on joining the group is a declaration of intent. The lack of the date on the document does not affect the validity and credibility of the declaration on joining the group.
  2. The presence of non-significant dissimilarities between individual factual bases of claims of particular group members does not preclude recognition of the claims as based on the same factual basis.

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

Adam Maciński, Regional Court Judge

Krzysztof Rudnicki, Regional Court Judge

Anna Stańczyk, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 7th December 2016 in Wrocław at the hearing the case filed by D. D. acting as a group representative against  Bank (…) S.A. with its registered office in W. for payment,

hereby decides to:

examine the case in group proceedings.

The judgements of the Regional Court in Wroclaw published on the website were facilitated by the President of the Regional 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, deleting data of group members, visual compilation and removing punctuation and literal errors. The rulings 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 Łódź 1st Civil Division of 19th December 2016

Written by

  1. The case may be examined in group proceedings if the following premises are fulfilled: at least 10 people pursuing one homogenous claim based on the same or similar factual basis and alternative inclusion of the object of the proceedings within the following categories: claims for the protection of consumers or claims for damage caused by hazardous products or claims for damage caused by a tort, save for claims for the protection of personal rights (Article 1 of Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings).
  2. ’The same‘ factual basis of pursued claims exists when factual circumstances are identical and a legal protection is sought by participants of one event, thus a bond based on the unity of the damage-causing event occurs. Similar‘ (equal) factual basis means the similarity of particular established facts.
  3. The essence of group proceedings is the commonality of demand which must be typical (common) for all claims and is based on the identical factual situation of the group members. non-significant dissimilarities may exist among individual grounds of the claims , but the significant factual circumstances should substantiate a demand which is common for all claims.
  4. The literal wording of the provision indicates that for ascertaining the admissibility of the group proceedings it is sufficient if at least 10 people pursue homogenous claims based on the same factual basis. Whereas, ascertaining whether all persons who submitted declarations on joining the group may be its members – is the next stage of group proceedings, which pursuant to Article 17 of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings ends with a decision on the group composition.
  5. The term ’claim’ within the meaning of Article 1.1 of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings (unlike Article 2 of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings) means the demand of the statement of claims. In consequence, the group proceedings are not limited only to action for performance.
  6. The important dissimilarity between filing an action for establishment of liability under Article 189 CCP and an action under Article 2.3 of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings ’for establishment of the defendant’s liability‘ is that the claimant is obligated to prove the legal interest if he pursues the claim under Article 189 CCP.
  7. The defendant who files a motion for obligating the claimant to make a deposit to secure the costs of the proceedings, should make plausible, firstly, that the pursued claims against him is obviously unfounded or that the acceptance of the statement of claims is unlikely, therefore has the characteristics of litigiousness. Secondly, the defendant should make plausible that the lack of the deposit to secure the future claim for reimbursement of costs of the proceedings will make an execution of the costs from the opposite party impossible or significantly more difficult.

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

Katarzyna Kamińska-Krawczyk, Regional Court Judge

Marzena Kluba, Regional Court Judge

Anna Jóźwiak, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 19th December 2016 in Łódź at the hearing the group action filed by the Municipal Consumer Ombudsman in W. against (…) with its registered office in W. for establishment of the defendant’s liability,

concerning: the admissibility of the group proceedings and defendant’s application to obligate the claimant to pay a deposit to secure the costs of the proceedings,

decides to:

  1. examine the case in group proceedings;
  2. dismiss the defendant’s motion to obligate the claimant to pay the deposit to secure the costs of the proceedings.

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 25th Civil Division of 15th December 2016

Written by

Non-final decision.

  1. Admissibility of a legal course depends on the factual circumstances provided by claimant as a basis of the claim. It is not contingent upon the demonstration of the existence of the claim. Neither is it dependent on the defendant’s charges or the defence method selected thereby. Court proceedings should prove whether the assertions presented in the statement of claims find a legal basis in provisions of substantive law. The court assesses only the admissibility of group proceedings i.e. the circumstances which substantiate examination of the case in group proceedings.
  2. A factual basis of the claims in group proceedings should be understood as the set of facts which substantiate Claimant’s claims in group proceedings. Claims may be based on the same or equal factual basis. Such claims should result from the same event or from similar events. When the same set of facts is the basis of rights and the parties to the proceedings are bound thereby, such a situation should be deemed as the same factual basis. In turn a set of analogical facts in the scope of a specific claim should be deemed as the equal factual basis.

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

Presiding Judge: Anna Pogorzelska, Regional Court Judge

Judges: Krystyna Stawecka, Regional Court Judge; Anna Ogińska-Łagiewka District Court Judge (delegated)

having examined on the 15th December 2016 at the hearing in Warsaw, the case filed by the Consumer Ombudsman against (…) joint stock company with the registered office in Warsaw, for payment,

decides to:

reject the statement of claims in group proceedings.

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 3rd Civil Division dated 5th December 2016

Written by

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

Presiding Judge:            Joanna Kruczkowska, Regional Court Judge

Judges:                            Joanna Bitner, Regional Court Judge, Grzegorz Chmiel, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 5th December 2016 in Warsaw at the hearing in camera the case filed by K.K. as the representative of the group against the Housing Association (…) in W. for the payment of PLN 1,700,667.19 regarding the Claimant’s motion of 10th November 2016 to complete or rectify the decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw in the present case dated 28th October 2016

hereby decides to:

  1. rectify the obvious inaccuracy in the decision of 28th October 2016 by putting (…) into point no. 1 subgroup I., 3rd position, and designate the remaining members of the group with numbers accordingly;
  2. discontinue the proceedings regarding the Claimant’s motion of 10th November 2016 for completing or rectifying the decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw dated 28th October 2016.