- 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.
- According to the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings, a class action is admissible only when the group is homogenuous. The group which consists of members who acquired their cars: in Germany, 20 directly in Poland, 6 as the lessee in Poland, 15 as the secondary buyer in Poland, 3 members as the result of donation in Poland and 3 as the buyer after the end of leasing agreement may not be deemed homogenuous. For these reasons the statement of claims should have been rejected.
- The relations between the group members and the representative of the group should be considered as a type of agency.
- In case of statements of claims pursued in group proceedings, the group representative possesses the formal legal capacity, whereas group members hold the substantive legal grounds for pursuing the claim. It should be emphasised that there are differences between class action proceedings and standard civil proceedings in pointing to the fallibility of the traditional concept of procedural substitution.
- It is necessary to make a distinction between the formal legal capacity and material legal grounds for pursuing a claim in group proceedings. Although the court decides on the substantive legitimacy of the claims pursued by each group or subgroup member and the judgment issued on these grounds is an enforcement order respectively, it should be emphasised that there is only one claimant in the proceedings – the group members’ representative. Although the group members can be examined as a party in the proceedings, in fact they are not a party thereto.
- Therefore, if the group members are not a party to the proceedings, the statement of claims may not be rejected in relation to a part of them, simply because it is impossible to reject a claim in relation to an entity who is not a party to the proceedings.
- It is impossible to reject a statement of claims partially, because only one claim is pursued in group proceedings. If separate claims of every group member were the object of the proceedings, the court would to award specific amounts to the group members’ benefit, and not the whole to the representative of the group. This is not the case. In procedural terms, in group proceedings there is only one claim, which is awarded to the benefit of the claimant – the group representative. Hence, there are no legal grounds for dividing and partially rejecting the claim.
- The group members’ situation should be identical already at first glance and this may not require an examination as to the evidence already at the initial stage of the litigation only to check whether the statement of claims may be partially rejected when the prerequisites of the admissibility of group proceedings are examined in general.
- It is impossible to reject a statement of claim concerning the group representative’s part of the claim and prosecute the case further without them. Other members of the group are not parties to the proceedings in the case, therefore a partial rejection of the statement of claims in the part regarding the group representative’s claim will result in the lack of a claimant in the proceedings.
Decision of the Regional Court in Warsaw 3rd Civil Division with the following ruling bench:
Presiding Judge: Joanna Bitner, Regional Court Judge (rapporteur)
Judges: Ewa Jończyk, Regional Court Judge
Grzegorz Chmiel, Regional Court Judge
having examined on 13rd November 2017 at the hearing in Warsaw the case filed by D.C. as the group representative against V. (…) with its registered office in W. (N.) for payment,
hereby decides:
- to reject the statement of claims;
- to charge the claimant with the costs of the proceedings, leaving the calculation thereof to the court clerk upon the decision becoming final and binding, whereby remuneration of the defendant’s attorney should amount to an equivalent of a 6-fold minimal rate.
