The main purpose of the article is to determine the mutual relations between mediation and court proceedings, as well as to answer the question whether mediation services provided by out-of-court entities should be considered as a part of the justice system and fulfill the constitutional right to court. The conducted research leads to the conclusion that both the judiciary and mediation should be considered as complementary methods of dispute resolution, although the first of them is granted primacy under the Polish Constitution i.a. due to the fact that mediation settlements are subject to court approval and not all types of disputes can be resolved bindingly in mediation. Mediation does not belong sensu sticto to the definition of the judiciary and does not fulfill the right to justice but may be included in a broad understanding of the judiciary and therefore its existence according to current regulations does not violate the position and rules of functioning of the judicial system. However, this situation can easily change, if the mandatory mediation planned by the legislator in divorce and legal separation cases comes into force.

Judgement of ECHR of 8 November 2021 in the case of Dolińska-Ficek and Ozimek v. Poland is undoubtedly one of the most important judgements issued by the Strasbourg Court in recent times. At the same time, it constitutes a continuation of the existing case-law of the ECHR in similar cases against Poland, in particular the reasoning expressed in the judgement of 22 July 2021 in the case of Reczkowicz v. Poland (Application no. 43447/19). In the judgement, the ECHR held that Poland’s action resulted in a violation of Art. 6 (1) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 4 November 1950, which establishes a set of due process guarantees.

Changes in the Justice System and the Enforceability of the Judgments of the National Bar of Attorneys at Law’s Disciplinary Courts – Notes in Relation to Article 17 sec. 1 of the Constitution

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the legal problem related to the activity of the disciplinary courts of the National Bar of Attorneys at Law in connection with the amendments enacted in 2017 in the area of the justice system. This issue is immanently connected with the questioning, both by Polish and international jurisprudence, of the status of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court that existed until 14 July 2022 as a court with constitutional features. Therefore, it is significant to answer the question whether the rulings of the disciplinary courts of the National Bar of Attorneys at Law, which have undergone cassation review in the Supreme Court, produce legal effects in the current legal state and should be enforced by the organs of the National Bar of Attorneys at Law. This issue is of fundamental importance for the activity of the National Bar of Attorneys at Law since the Bar’s ability to fulfil the constitutional function of concerning itself with the proper practice of the profession of an attorney at law largely depends on the answer to this question.

Gloss to the Judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court of 6 May 2021, file ref. no. II GOK 3/18

The judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court of 6 May 2021, the subject of which was the assessment of the legality of the resolution of the National Council of the Judiciary on the submission (failure to present) of applications for appointment to the position of a Supreme Court judge in the Civil Chamber, created the possibility of challenging the composition of the adjudicating panels with the participation of judges selected in this procedure. However, the administrative court did not assess the validity of the appointments of judges, finding that the effects of the ruling issued in this case do not relate to the systemic validity and effectiveness of presidential appointments to the office of judge. Therefore, the judgment does not resolve the key issue determining the effectiveness of the appointment of the judiciary

Judge’s assistant de lege lata and de lege ferenda. Practical problems of assistance to adjudicators

This article draws attention to the modern, practical problems of the justice system, taking into account the profession of a judge’s assistant. Defines its tasks and unclear grounding in Polish law. Points out disproportion of requirements. Presents the problem of staff shortages and their consequences, and shows a potential remedy. Highlights the growing problem of inefficiency and lengthiness of the justice system.