Court of Appeals in Warsaw 7th Commercial and Intellectual Property Division in the following ruling bench:
Presiding Judge: Arkadiusz Ziarko, Regional Court Judge (del.)
having examined on 22nd September 2021 in Warsaw at the hearing in camera, the case filed by (…) Polska sp. z o.o. in Warsaw against (…) Limited in N. (Cyprus) for the protection of copyrights and related rights in group proceedings
following the defendant’s complaint against the decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw of 27th April 2021, file reference no. XX GC 1004/12
hereby decides to:
- dismiss the complaint;
- leave the decision on the costs of the complaint proceedings to the Regional Court in Warsaw to be made in the final decision closing the case in the first instance.
- Claims based on the same factual basis are claims, the factual basis of which are the same or claims whose relevant factual circumstances are common. The abovementioned “commonality” should be interpreted widely. The requirement of the same or equal factual basis of the claims does not mean that the factual basis of the lawsuit consists of identical circumstances, but their relevant similarity is sufficient.
- The essence of group proceedings is the gathering of many entities’ claims in one proceeding. Such a cumulation is justified due to the economics of the proceedings and the pointlessness of conducting many similar cases. Group proceedings are to be a special procedural institution to resolve more and more frequent conflicts which a larger number of people are involved in. The function of the proceedings is, among others, increasing the efficiency of examining cases regarding the same legal and factual issues, by including the assessment of these issues in one proceeding. This allows the courts to be relieved from the repeated and time-consuming judgement of analogous issues constituting the premises for many claims submitted by individual group members and eliminates the risk of incompatible judicature on these issues.
- The object of the group proceedings aimed at the establishment of the defendant’s liability, are the only circumstances common for all group members, not individual circumstances concerning particular group members, which will be examined in subsequent individual proceedings.
The Court of Appeals in Warsaw 5th Civil Division with the following ruling bench:
Presiding Judge: Bernard Chazan, Court of Appeals Judge
Judges: Edyta Jefimko, Court of Appeals Judge (rapporteur)
Robert Obrębski, Court of Appeals Judge
having examined on 10th March 2020 in Warsaw at the hearing in camera the group action filed by Ł. K. against (…) Bank Spółka Akcyjna with its registered office in W., for payment,
following the defendant’s complaint against the decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw of 27th September 2019, file ref. no. IV C 281/18,
decides to
- dismiss the complaint.
- At the stage of the proceedings regarding the admissibility of the group proceedings, the court only examines whether the premises for that admissibility such as: the homogeneity of the group members’ claims, similarity or identicalness of the factual basis of the group members’ claims, numerosity of the group, standardization of the pecuniary claims and the ability of the claims to be examined in group proceedings – are fulfilled.
- The requirement of a similar or identical factual basis does not mean that all the facts of each claim should be similar or identical. Group proceedings fulfill their functions if the group members’ claims are ‘typical’ or ‘representative’. Obviously, slight differences may appear between the individual basis of claims, but it is necessary for the relevant factual circumstances to justify the demand common for all claims.
- It is deemed to be sufficient that basic circumstances of group members’ cases, which may determine the very principle of the defendant’s liability, are similar.
- The jurisprudence emphasizes that a class action is treated as a whole and it is not possible to reject the claim as to some group members and to hear the case as to the others.
The Court of Appeals in Wroclaw 1st Civil Division with the following ruling bench:
Presiding judge: Iwona Biedroń, Court of Appeals Judge (rapporteur)
Judges: Anna Guzińska, Court of Appeals Judge
Grażyna Matuszek, Court of Appeals Judge
having examined on 27th December 2019 in Wroclaw at the hearing in camera the action filed by the Municipal Consumer Ombudsman in the Capital City of Warsaw (a group representative) against (…) Bank S.A. with its registered office in W. for the establishment of the defendant’s liability,
following the defendant’s complaint against the decision of the Regional Court in Wroclaw of 9th September 2019, file ref. no I C 976/17,
decides to:
dismiss the complaint.
The decision is not valid and final.
- 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.
- 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).
- 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.
- 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.
- Therefore, the identical factual basis exists when there is one multilateral legal relationship, and a similar factual basis – many legal relationships.
- 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.
- 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.
- To implement the group proceedings, it is sufficient that the set of basic circumstances constituting the factual basis of the demand is the same in relation to a sufficient number of persons. It is not, however, strictly necessary for convergence to occur in respect to all the circumstances forming the factual basis of the claims of individual group members.
- Members of a group may raise claims of a different nature, and this is acceptable if such claims are made by all members of the group. Therefore, it is not the case that more than one claim can be made in a class action.
- For the class action to be effective it is not a prerequisite for the facts of each claimant to be identical, as the appellant seems to expect. For the possibility of hearing a case in group proceedings, it is sufficient that the circumstances leading to the defendant’s liability towards each of the claimants are sufficiently common to allow the same mechanism of action of the entity responsible for the damage leading to its occurrence in each of them to be associated with them.
- The necessity to pursue ‘one type of claim’ in group proceedings means that all group members are required to seek damages or the establishment or shaping of a legal relationship or law. However, this does not mean that it is not admissible to submit more than one claim in group proceedings. Group members may submit different types of claims, provided that all of these claims are sought by all group members.
- The fact that the basic circumstances making up the factual basis of the claim are the same for a sufficient number of persons is sufficient for the implementation of group proceedings. The convergence of all circumstances constituting a factual basis of individual group members’ claims is not absolutely necessary.
The Regional Court in Warsaw 24th Civil Division in the following ruling bench:
Presiding Judge: Katarzyna Bojańczyk, Regional Court Judge
Judges: Paweł Pyzio, Regional Court Judge
Agnieszka Bedyńska-Abramczyk, Regional Court Judge
having examined on 1st February 2018 in Warsaw at the open hearing the case filed by Municipal Consumer Ombudsman of the Capital City of Warsaw against (…) S.A. with its registered office in W. for payment and establishment of the defendant’s liability,
hereby decides to:
examine the case in group proceedings.
- The same factual basis of claims occurs when all the claims are based on the same set of facts. This is usually one and the same factual event that is the source of many claims. On the other hand, the similar factual basis occurs when various facts form basis of pursued claims, however these facts are analogical and thus show a connection justifying treating them as ‘similar’.
- The similarity of actual events, significant from the point of view of the admissibility of group proceedings, does not assume the necessary identity of these events. Apart from significant similarities, there may also be some discrepancies in the basis of the actual claim regarding the nature of specific individual claims, their maturity, or amount. However, the occurrence of these differences does not constitute an inadmissibility of a class action based on the same basic circumstances that constitute the actual basis of an action. The following differences should be considered as not excluding the possibility of prosecuting a case in group proceedings: different value of redemption of individual insurance contracts, different amount of administrative fees, different amount of remuneration in case of death, differences in the wording of individual clauses of contract templates or names of individual standard terms used by the defendant.
The Court of Appeals in Warsaw 6th Civil Division in the following ruling bench:
Presiding Judge: Ksenia Sobolewska-Filcek, Court of Appeals Judge
Judges: Krzysztof Tuchacz, Court of Appeals Judge
Jacek Sadomski, Court of Appeals Judge (rapporteur)
having examined on 28th December 2017 in Warsaw at the hearing in camera a case for payment filed by the District Consumer Ombudsman in K. (…) against (…) (…) S.A. in W.
as a result of the claimant’s complaint against the decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw of 15th December 2016, file ref. no. XXV C 918/15,
decides to:
amend the contested decision in its entirety by ascertaining the admissibility of hearing the case in group proceedings.
