The Constitutionality of Excluding the Openness of Court Sessions in Civil Proceedings – a Contribution to the Discussion

This article is a contribution to the discussion on the constitutionality of examining civil cases in camera. The remarks presented in the article are based on the assumption that the essence of in camera sessions is not compliant with the constitutional right to an open examination of the case, which – being a component of the right to a properly shaped court procedure, co-creates the content of the right to a court. These sessions are the most far-reaching form of limiting, or rather excluding, openness of court sessions – both in its external and internal aspect. Therefore, the article attempts to assess the use of in camera sessions considering acceptable exceptions to the public nature of court sessions. Finally, reference was made to a party’s right to consideration of a case without undue delay, which also co-creates the right to a court.

Exclusion of Article 148 (1) § 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure in the Light of the Constitutional Right to an Open Hearing

The purpose of this study is to analyze the constitutionality of the provisions excluding the application of Art. 148 (1) § 3 of the Civil Procedure Code – i.e. Art. 505 (1a) and 205 (5) § 1 (1), added by the Act of 9 March 2023 amending the Civil Procedure Code and certain other acts. These provisions deprive a party of the right to submit a motion that allows preventing a case from being heard at a closed session pursuant to Art. 148 (1) § 1. This occurred in cases in which a preparatory hearing was scheduled but the dispute was not resolved, and in cases heard in simplified procedure, where the value of the subject matter of the dispute does not exceed PLN 4,000. These changes make it even more difficult to defend the thesis on the constitutionality of hearing the case in accordance with Art. 148 (1) § 1.