Judgment of the Supreme Court, Civil Chamber, dated 12th April 2023

Written by

  1. In the case of proceedings initiated prior to the date of entry into force of the Law of 7th April 2017 on Amendments to Certain Acts to Facilitate Debt Recovery – the validity of the decisions to hear the case in group proceedings does not preclude the Supreme Court from reviewing whether the claims sought can actually be pursued in these proceedings; such review is not prevented by Article 10a of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings – as this regulation took effect on 1st June 2017, and pursuant to Article 13 of the Act of 7th April 2017 on Amendments to Certain Acts to Facilitate Debt Recovery, it applies to proceedings initiated from the date of entry into force of the said Act.
  2. The homogeneity of the claims pursued in group proceedings and their reliance on the same or similar factual basis is evidenced by the very content of the demand and the concurrence or identicality of the facts indicated in support of it; Article 1 Section 1 of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings refers to a procedural claim, not a claim under substantive law.

The Supreme Court in the Civil Chamber, composed of:

Presiding judge:             Małgorzata Manowska, First President of the Supreme Court

Judges:                            Beata Janiszewska, Supreme Court Judge (Judge – Rapporteur);

Robert Stefanicki, Supreme Court Judge

having reviewed at a session in camera on 12th April 2023 in Warsaw, the appeal in cassation of the State Treasury – the Masovian Voivode, the State Water Management Company Polish Waters against the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Łódź of 14th April 2021, I ACa 1099/18; I ACz 1451/18, in a case brought by W. S. as a representative of a group in group proceedings, consisting of: [data of 28 group members] against the State Treasury – the Mazovian Voivode, the State Water Management Company Polish Waters and the Mazovian Voivodeship for determination,

  1. dismisses the appeal in cassation,
  2. awards from the State Treasury –  the Mazovian Voivode, the State Water Management Company Polish Waters in favor of W. S. as a representative of the group in the group proceedings the amount of PLN 5,400 (five thousand four hundred) as reimbursement of the costs of the cassation proceedings.

Decision of the Regional Court in Poznań, 1st Civil Division, dated 17th February 2023

Written by

  1. The issuance of a decision regarding the composition of the group concludes the second phase of group proceedings, which is the formation of the group. As soon as the decision on the composition of the group is issued, the composition of the group is petrified. From that moment on, it is no longer possible to join the group. Reduction in the size of the group may occur only in exceptional cases – as a result of the death of a group member, a change in the decision on the composition due to new circumstances.
  2. The plaintiff (group representative) bears the burden of proving the fact that a certain person is a member of the group, which justifies the claim filed in the group proceeding (plausibility in cases involving a non-monetary claim). The defendant, on the other hand, bears the burden of proving the facts that dam and nullify the plaintiff’s claim, i.e. the facts that justify its objections to the claim.
  3. The validity of the decision to hear the case in a group proceeding and the decision dismissing the complaint against this decision constitutes about res judicata, especially in the scope challenged by the defendant and the arguments used for this purpose.
  4. The authorization to act on behalf of a group does not require written form for its validity, the act on group proceedings does not provide for any special solutions in this regard, and by way of reference under Article 24 of the above-mentioned act to the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, one should refer to the Code of Civil Procedure, which provisions do not provide for the written form of a power of attorney under pain of invalidity.
  5. The homogeneity of the claims pursued in group proceedings will ultimately be determined by the factual relationship between the claims made.
  6. Group proceedings are also permissible when the premise of the occurrence of damage and its amount depends on individual factual circumstances concerning individual members of the group.
  7. The court, when issuing a decision during the second phase of the group proceeding, i.e., granting a particular person the status of a group member, should compare the claim filed by that person with the characteristics of the model group specified in the decision issued under Article 10 of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings. Thus, the claim of an individual person should fall within the subject matter limits of the group claim specified in the decision issued under Article 10 in conjunction with Article 1 of the aforementioned Act.

The Regional Court in Poznań, 1st Civil Division, composed of:

Presiding judge:                    Katarzyna Jelewska – Sterczała, Regional Courte Judge

having recognized on 17th February 2023 in Poznań in group proceedings at a session in camera the case brought by J. P. – representative of the Group against (…) Investment Fund Society Joint-Stock Company with its registered office in P. for determination of the issue concerning the composition of the Group decides to:

determine the composition of the Group, which includes the following persons: B. K., G. P., M. W., A. W., J. Pł., A. C., E. N., D. O., B. D., S. M., S. B., S. M., P. C., E. C., B. B., S. B., P. M., J. K., M. K., A. W., A. S., J. G., R. D., J. S., D. M., D. K., J. M., M., J. M., A. S., D. B..

Decision of the Regional Court in Poznań, 18th Civil Division, dated 10th August 2018

Written by

  1. At this stage of the examination of the prerequisites for the admissibility of a group lawsuit, the court is obliged to assess them formally. In particular, the court should verify whether the prerequisites for bringing a group lawsuit provided for in Articles 1 and 2 of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings have been met.
  2. According to well-established jurisprudence, claims based on the same factual basis are claims that have the same factual basis (premise sensu stricto) or claims whose material facts are common (premise sensu largo). Of course, there may be slight differences between individual bases of claims, but it is essential that the material facts justify the demand common to all claims.

The Regional Court in Poznań, 18th Civil Division, composed of:

Presiding Judge:           Joanna Ciesielska – Borowiec, Regional Court Judge

Judges:                           Magdalena Ławrynowicz, Regional Court Judge;

Adrianna Foligowska, District Court Judge (delegated) (Judge – Rapporteur)

having recognized on 10th August 2018 in Poznań at a session in camera the case brought by [data of 16 persons] against R. T. Joint-Stock Company, seated in Ł. for payment,

decides to:

pursuant to Article 10 Section 1 of the Act of 17th December 2009 on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings (Journal of Laws 2018, item 573.), recognize the present case in group proceedings.

Decision of the Court of Appeals in Warsaw 7th Commercial and Intellectual Property Division of 22nd September 2021

Written by

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:

  1. dismiss the complaint;
  2. 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.

Decision of the Court of Appeals in Warsaw 5th Civil Division of 10th March 2020

Written by

  1. 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.
  1. 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.
  1. 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

  1. dismiss the complaint.

Decision of the Court of Appeals in Wroclaw 1st Civil Division of 27th December 2019

Written by

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.

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.

Decision of the Court of Appeals in Warsaw 1st Civil Division of 4th October 2018

Written by

  1. 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.
  2. 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.

Judgment of the Court of Appeals in Gdansk 5th Civil Division of 26th September 2018

Written by

  1. 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.

Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 24th Civil Division of 1st February 2018

Written by

  1. 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.
  2. 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.