Judgment of the Regional Court in Warsaw 2nd Civil Division of 17th December 2013

Written by

  1. A declaratory judgment rendered in group proceedings rather corresponds to an interlocutory judgment known for a long time in classical civil proceedings. This would mean that group proceedings would cover all the premises of legitimacy and contestability of a claim, including the charge of limitation period, leaving only the issue of the value of claims to be settled in further actions.
  2. The argument that Article 2 (3) of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings directly excludes legal interest as a prerequisite of class action, cannot be successfully used to undermine the thesis stated hereinbefore. It seems that the rationale of the regulation was to prevent the dismissal of a claim for establishment of one’s liability due only to the fact that submitting a demand for performance was possible. This would mean that ’an  action for establishment of liability in group proceedings has become a particular type of an action in group proceedings, not identical one with the claim for establishment of liability regulated under the Code of Civil Procedure, similarly as the claim for performance in group proceedings shows characteristics setting it apart from a classical claim action.

The Regional Court in Warsaw 2nd Civil Division in the following ruling bench:

Presiding Judge: Tomasz Wojciechowski, Regional Court Judge

Judges: Sylwia Urbańska, Regional Court Judge, Katarzyna Waseńczuk, District Court Judge (delegated)

having examined on 17th December 2013 the case filed by the Poviat of (…) as the representative of the group of Poviats (…) against the State Treasury – the Minister of Infrastructure and Development represented by the Office of the Attorney General of the State Treasury

for the establishment

hereby decides to:

  1. dismiss the claim;
  2. award from the Poviat of (…) to the State Treasury – the Office of the Attorney General the amount of PLN 10,800 (ten thousand eight hundred złoty) as the costs of the proceeding;
  3. establish the final court fee in the amount of PLN 5,000 ;
  4. order the State Treasury to reimburse the Poviat of (…) with the amount of PLN 5,000 as the differential amount between the final and temporary court fee.

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 3rd Civil Division of 27th November 2013

Written by

The decision was changed by the decision of the Court of Appeals in Warsaw, 6th Civil Division of 25th March 2014, file ref. no. VI ACz 4778/13, by dismissing the defendant’s motion for obligating the claimant to make a deposit.

  1. The manner of determining the deposit is based on the establishment of a probable total of costs to be borne by the defendant in group proceedings.
  2. The deposit for securing the costs of group proceedings aims to secure the defendant’s interests against an unsubstantiated initiation of group proceedings and is to guarantee that the claimant will reimburse the defendant for the costs incurred thereby.

Decision of the Regional Court for Warsaw-Praga in Warsaw 3rd Civil Division of 24th September 2013

Written by

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

Presiding Judge:  Ewa Dietkow, Regional Court Judge

Judges:  Beata Karczewska-Mazur, Regional Court Judge, Radosław Olszewski, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 24th September 2013 in Warsaw at the hearing in camera the case filed by S.P. against J.W. (…) joint-stock company for payment

hereby decides to:

  1. publicly announce the commencement of the group proceedings in the case filed by S.P., acting as the representative of the group, against (…) joint-stock company, file ref. no. III C 491/12 for payment, by displaying the the following announcement in the court’s building for a period of one month:

‘The Regional Court for Warsaw-Praga in Warsaw, 3rd Civil Division hereby announces that under the Polish Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings, a class action with file ref. no. III C 491/12 was initiated to the statement of claims filed by S.P. against (…) joint-stock company for payment of undue performance paid to the defendant on the grounds of “preliminary sales contracts”‘ for residential premises which included valorization clauses providing for the defendant’s right to independently and unilaterally raise the price of the residential premises after the conclusion of the preliminary contract without granting the consumer the right to withdraw from the contract in connection with the increase in the price.

The Regional Court for Warsaw-Praga in Warsaw informs about the possibility of joining the proceedings available to parties whose claims might be included in the class action – by way of submitting a written declaration on joining the group to the representative of the group: S.P., ul. (…), in W. (…), (…)-(…) W., represented by R.P., attorney-at-law, within the time period of 3 months as of the day of the publication of the announcement.

Individual subgroups were created on the understanding that the value of the pursued claims is equal in each group. The value of the claims was standardised – to the lowest value appertaining to a subgroup member, each of the subgroups having at least 2 members. Furthermore, the claim in the scope of the interest was standardised by way of counting them as of the day of the service of the statement of claims until the day of payment. Each subgroup is thus entitled to a claim as follows: PLN 25,606.30 (subgroup 1), PLN 10,000.00 (subgroup 2), PLN 5,901.29 (subgroup 3), PLN 7,502.87 (subgroup 4), PLN 13,550.00 (subgroup 5), PLN 19,923.27 (subgroup 6), PLN 30,000.00 (subgroup 7), PLN 17,234.36 (subgroup 8).

The rules of remuneration for the representative’s ’attorney’s remuneration were provided for in the agreement of 15th February 2012 concluded by and between R.P., attorney-at-law, and the representative of the group, S.P., according to which:

a) The attorney is to obtain remuneration for prosecuting the case in the amount of 15% of the gross amount executed from the defendant, payable after the defendant pays, according to the rules provided for in the contract between a group member and the attorney, without prejudice to the point below.

b) In order to join the group a member is obligated to pay a gross lump sum of PLN 1,000.00 for attorney’s costs and expenses incurred in connection with the action, in case of joining the group after the statement of claims was filed, but not more than 15% of the gross pursued claim– the fee is to be paid on the day of joining the group or on the day indicated by the attorney and is not reimbursable. The remuneration of the attorney indicated in pt. 1 is to be decreased by the paid fee.

The Regional Court for Warsaw-Praga in Warsaw informs that the judgment rendered in the case will be binding on all the persons who have joined the proceedings.’

  1. to call the representative of the group, S.P., to pay an advance in the amount of PLN 3.000,00 for the costs connected with the publishing of this announcement in the press – within a period of 2 weeks– under pain of abstaining from the publishing of the announcement until that moment.

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 2nd Civil Division of 24th September 2013

Written by

  1. The decision concerning composition of the group which is rendered pursuant to Article 17 of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings, may only decide on granting the group member status to persons who, following the announcement on commencement of the group proceedings, submitted declarations on joining the group to the group representative. Therefore, the court may not reassess whether the persons who joined the group at the stage of filing the statement of claims met the premises required by the Act. This is because with respect to these persons, the decision on examining the case in group proceedings resulted in determining the composition of the group. The conclusion of that stage of group proceedings means that objections in respect to the composition of the original group may not be raised.
  2. The burden of presenting facts in favor of admissibility of group proceedings, a particular person’s participation in a subgroup, as well as the burden of submitting to court the evidence proving these facts, shall rest with the group representative. The consequence of a failure to comply with this obligation at the stage following the announcement on commencement of group proceedings and submission of the declaration on joining the group by new members is a refusal to grant the group member status.
  3. Submitting a declaration on joining the group dies not suffice to prove that a person belongs to the group; at this stage, the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings requires verifiable evidence to be submitted. Participation of particular individuals in the group may be proved by all means of evidence.  
  4. However, the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings does not require a declaration on joining the subgroup, indeed not only does a failure to indicate the amount of demand preclude qualification of individuals freshly joining the proceedings to a particular subgroup but also – to the group in general.  

The Regional Court in Warsaw 2nd Civil Division in the following ruling bench:

Presiding Judge: Sylwia Urbańska, Regional Court Judge

Judges: Tomasz Wojciechowski, Regional Court Judge; Katarzyna Waseńczuk, District Court Judge (delegated)

having examined on 24th September 2013 in Warsaw at the hearing in camera the case filed by K. S. (1) acting as a group representative on behalf of [15 people] against (…) Zakład (…) S.A. in W. for payment, as regards the establishment of the group compostition,

hereby decides to:

refuse to grant a status of the group member to the following people: [personal data of the group members].

Decision of the Regional Court in Kraków 1st Civil Division of 10th September 2013

Written by

The Regional Court in Kraków in the following ruling bench:

Presiding Judge: Ewa Olszewska, Regional Court Judge

Judges: Anna Rakoczy, Regional Court Judge; Andrzej Żelazowski Regional Court Judge

having examined on 10th September 2013 at the hearing in camera the case filed by (…) against (…) for payment,

decides:

that the group consists of: [data of the group members].

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 2nd Civil Division of 3rd September 2013

Written by

  1. A demand for the establishment of a defendant’s liability combined with a demand for the establishment that in relation to each member of the group circumstances mentioned in Article 446.3 of the Civil Code occurred, i.e. deterioration in the living standard after the death of a relative, is a claim which does not meet the homogeneity criterion.
  2. The notion of liability in the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings should be understood according to the general principles – as a sanction related to a negative assessment of the obligated party’s conduct – i.e. an obligation to provide a performance. Therefore, it is inadmissible to limit a court’s decision to establishing that the defendant holds liability for a specific event, omitting an examination whether a member of the group sustained damage as a result of this event. Establishment in the meaning of Article 2.3 of the Act should be understood analogically as in a declaratory action based on Article 189 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and hence, the establishment at hand means the examination by the court of all prerequisites of liability.
  3. In the Court’s opinion, the provision of Article 446.3 of the Civil Code from which the group members derive their claims provides for the protection of financial interests. In the event of a death of the closest person, the protection of personal interest in the form of a family bond is presently guaranteed by Article 446.4 of the Civil Code. The claim from Article 446.3 of the Civil Code for damages for the closest family members of the deceased on the grounds of significant deterioration of their living standards is not a claim aimed at the protection of personal interests.
  4. At the stage of examination of the admissibility of hearing the case in group proceedings, circumstances of potential significance for the content-related decision remain outside of the object of examination – in the case at hand this refers to the defendant’s allegations regarding the lack of the State Treasury’s liability and the defence of limitation. The potential legitimacy of the claims does not constitute a prerequisite for initiating a group proceedings.

The decision was changed by the decision of the Supreme Court of 28th January 2015, file ref. no. I CSK 533/14.

Decision of the Regional Court in Bydgoszcz 1st Civil Division of 30th July 2013

Written by

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

Wojciech Rybarczyk, Regional Court Judge

Hanna Daniel – Kunach, Regional Court Judge

Hanna Rucińska, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 30th July 2013 in Bydgoszcz at the hearing in camera the case filed by B.B. against G. N. B. S.A. with its registered office in W. for payment,

decides to:

declare the composition of the group which consists in the following members: 1. P. B., (…) 134 K. I.

The judgements of the Regional Court in in Bydgoszcz published on the website were facilitated by the President of the District Court in Bydgoszcz in the letter of 27th August 2019, and then processed by the entity operating this website. The judgements have been translated by the entity operating this website.

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 20th Commercial Division of 24th July 2013

Written by

  1. It is essential to unambiguously distinguish two, independent procedural institutions of group proceedings: the premises of the admissibility of group proceedings indicated in Article 1.1 and 1.2 in conjunction with Article 2.1 of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings, the lack of which lead to the rejection of the statement of claims and the additional formal requirements of the statement of claims enlisted in Article 6 of the Act, the lack of which, if not completed after court’s summons, should lead to return of the statement of claims, according to the Article 130.2 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
  2. Homogeneous claims are claims originating from the homogeneous legal relationship, even if there are different substantive law claims arising out of it.
  3. The necessity of the occurrence of a particular set of facts, that justify the existence of a particular legal relation does not mean that the entire factual status of the case has to be based on the same facts.
  4. Declarations on joining the group are written declarations of will to participate in the group. This is only a demonstration of entering into the legal relation of representation for the purposes of the group proceedings. There is a possibility of specifying this by indicating particular elements by reference to the explicit and precise content of the statement of claims.
  5. The persons organising the group gain member status after submitting the statement of claims together with declarations on joining the group, which makes it obvious, that the procedural effect is independent of the date indicated in the declarations.
  6. The only limitation of the freedom of contracts relating to the legal counsel’s fee in group proceedings is the limit of the commission for pursuing pecuniary claims to 20% of the awarded amount. This limitation undoubtedly does not refer to the possibility of stipulating an additional success fee for pursuing non-pecuniary claims or accounting for the legal counsel’s associates’ remuneration at the established rate, as this is a common market practice, which is consistent with the law and principles of social coexistence.
  7. If a comparison of the value of the object of the dispute and the amount of the expected costs with claimant’s material situation justifies the assertion that the possible costs of the proceedings will be reimbursed, it is possible to waive the obligation of paying the deposit to secure the costs of the proceedings by the claimant.

 

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 16th Commercial Division of 12th July 2013

Written by

The decision was set aside with the decision of the Court of Appeals in Warsaw of 18th February 2014, file ref. no. I ACz 22/14. The thesis questioned by the Court of Appeals in Warsaw have been italicized.

  1. Disruption of gaining profits from the conducted business activity is undoubtedly a case of violating one’s personal rights. The location of the claim aimed at personal right’s protection and also whether this is an absolute protection (without fault) – as in the case of means of protection stipulated directly in Article 24 of the Civil Code, or relative – as in the case of means of legal protection resulting from the perpetration of a tort, is without any meaning.
  2. In the scope of formal requirements, the legislator finally accepted the procedural limitations of group actions through the imposition of the requirement of the same or similar (equal) factual basis of the claims, as well as the standardization of the claims of each member of the group, in consideration of the common circumstances of the case.
  3. The literature presents an opinion that the same legal basis of the claim (identity of the factual circumstances) takes place when there is a bond between the members of the group, based on the unity of a legal event. This would mean that the requirement of the same factual basis would be fulfilled through the indication by the claimant, of the event in the form of the broadcasting forbidden advertisements. Such an opinion cannot be agreed with. Such a factual basis of the claims would be sufficient in the event in which the claimant would pursue only the establishment of compensatory liability. However, in the present case, the claimant is not only pursing the establishment of compensation liability, but also further consequences, resulting from this fact, meaning the compensation for damages. And in such a case, apart from the event causing damage, the circumstances substantiating the extent of the damage and the causal link between the event and the damage should be indicated, as not every relationship is relevant but only an adequate causal relationship. i.e. covering the normal consequences of a given reason.
  4. The aim of the group proceedings is enabling access to court as well as speeding up the proceedings with the significant lowering of their costs, while the group action alone is to become the instrument enabling fast and effective pursuit of claims by consumers as well as by entrepreneurs.

 

Decision of the Regional Court in Szczecin 1st Civil Division of 9th July 2013

Written by

  1. The aim of the provisions on group proceedings is facilitating the pursuit of claims even by a very large number of persons who claim that their rights were violated, and who, for various reasons, cannot take the effort connected with individual participation in court proceedings. This aim would be thwarted if the Court could reject the statement of claims due to laconically indicated charges.
  2. Deciding on the admissibility of group proceedings, the court only examines the formal premises for examining the case in these proceedings. This is supported by the wording of Article 10 of the Act on pursuing claims in group proceedings, which provides for the rejection of the statement of claims in the event of the lack of premises, and not its dismissal. At this stage, the Court does not examine the demands from the content-related point of view. Deciding on the admissibility of group proceedings, the court only ascertains whether commencing to establish the composition of the group as well as to the content-related examination of the case is admissible.