The costs of judical proceedings in the light of the constitutional principle of the right of recourse to court

The right of recourse to court is one of the basic rights, which are guaranteed for an entity at the constitutional level in every democratical state. One of its parts is the access to court, which determinates the possibility of starting the proceedings before the court, in order to defend one’s rights. The aim of this elaboration is presenting the access to court in the civil proceedings in the light of costs of this proceeding. The author underlines the function of the legal costs by recalling the doctrine views, the position of the jurisdiction and by underscoring the guidelines of the Constitutional Tribunal in this area. Moreover, the institutions of the exemption from the costs and legal aid in polish law are analysed in the elaboration. Basing on the analisis, the author makes a conclusion, that the model of paid civil proceeding is not contrary to the right of recourse to court, that the current solution is compatibile with the general limitation clause and justified by the function and role of the institution of legal cost in the democratical state of law.

Formal law of disciplinary responsibility of the judges of the common courts

The purpose of this article is to present the process of disciplinary liability that the judges of the common courts are subject to especially in relation to the constitutional principle of judges’ independence. In this context, they are discussed the formal aspects of the disciplinary procedure, particularly those concerning initiation of proceedings, recognizing the disciplinary case, joinder of proceedings, appeal and resumption of final judgment. This issue will be used to answer the question, what the function is and what disciplinary proceedings are for in relation to constitutional right to a fair trial and also whether current legislation needs corrections.

The right to a fair trial in the European Convention on Human Rights,  in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and  in the Constitution of the Republic of Poland – selected issues (part I)

The purpose of this paper is the presentation of some selected issues connected with the right to a fair trial (the right to court, the right to legal proceedings), which is a key element of human rights protection and serves to provide procedural means to safeguard the rule of law. The right to a fair trial is generally guaranteed in acts of international law and in democratic constitutions. The Author of this paper compares regulations of this issue in the European Convention on Human Rights, in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and in the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. Because of the extent of the presented subject, article was divided into two parts – the first one, which contains the introduction to the subject of the right to a fair trial and the analysis of this issue in the European Convention on Human Rights and the second part, which presents the regulation of the right to a fair trial in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and in the Constitution of the Republic of Poland.

The right to a fair trial in the European Convention on Human Rights, in the Fundamental Rights of the European Union and in the Constitution of the Republic of Poland – selected issues (part II)

The purpose of this paper is the presentation of some selected issues connected with the right to a fair trial (the right to court, the right to legal proceedings), which is a key element of human rights protection and serves to provide procedural means to safeguard the rule of law. The right to a fair trial is generally guaranteed in acts of international law and in democratic constitutions. The Author of this paper compares regulations of this issue in the European Convention on Human Rights, in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and in the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. Because of the extent of the presented subject, article was divided into two parts – the first one, which contains the introduction to the subject of the right to a fair trial and the analysis of this issue in the European Convention on Human Rights and the second part, which presents the regulation of the right to a fair trial in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and in the Constitution of the Republic of Poland.

Constitutional basis of the right to a fair trial (principle of statutory regulation of the judiciary)

The article emphasizes the importance of multidimensional character of principle of statutory regulation of the judiciary. The principle is recognized as an important element of the right to a fair trial. It guarantees judicial independence. The principle bindfulfilling of the judiciary power with the will of the Nation. However recent political crisis connected with the Constitutional Court indicates that the statutes regulating the position of the judiciary should correspond with the substantive and formal constitutional requirements.

The limits of legislator’s leeway in regulation of the constitutional right to a fair trial

In Article 45 section 1 and Article 77 section 2 of the Constitution enacts the right to court understood as the right of access to a court, i.e. the right to initiate proceedings before a court, the right to frame a judicial procedure in accordance with the requirements of fairness and transparency, the right to a ruling by independent and impartial court, i.e. the right to obtain a binding resolution of the case by the court within a reasonable period of time and prohibition of disabling legal means serving the pursuit of constitutional rights and freedoms. The right to a fair trial is not absolute and may be restricted by using the rules set out in Article 31 section 3 of the Constitution (restriction can be introduced by statue only when it is justified in democratic state of law it is necessary to secure protection, public order, protection of the environment, health, public morality, and must not violate the essence of the rights and freedoms).

Right to a fair trial as an individual right and a guarantee of the horizontal application of rights and freedoms

The article discusses a right to a fair trial as a personal right that is a subject to limitations provided by the Constitution and as a guarantee of the horizontal application of rights and freedoms. The author analysis four elements of a right to a fair trial, namely a right of access to a court, a right to due process, a right to the final decision and a right to a proper judicial system. A right to a fair trial is applied directly, unless the Constitution provides otherwise. Its three forms are distinguished, namely autonomous application of the Constitution, co-application of the Constitution and a statute (or another normative act) and control application. Among positive obligations of the State there is the duty to ensure a right to a fair trial in case of the violation of constitutional rights by other subjects, including private subjects.

Constitutionality of limitations on right to a fair trial in cases concerning protection of competition and consumers

The article discusses de lege lata limitations regarding the constitutionally protected right to fair trial, with particular attention to matters regarding competition and consumer protection. An assessment is performed of the constitutionality of solutions adopted by the Polish legislator, and the constitutionally defined contours of the right to court in that category of cases is elaborated. The author reflects on the existing system of judicial review, considering whether it is not dysfunctional in some of its aspects, and how it could be replaced by another system for protecting the rights of enterprises; primarily these divagations address protection of procedural rights in a manner compliant with the Constitution of Poland, more specifically the right to court.

Right to court in Germany

The term ‘right to court’ is not used by the German constitutional law doctrine. However, the expressions ‘the principle of effective legal protection’ or ‘claim for ensuring justice’ should be treated as its equivalents. German Basic Law does not contain any general provision proclaiming right to court and determining its essential elements. However, ensuring effective judicial protection is considered to be a general constitutional principle and a constitutional right of an individual. It is also acknowledged that everyone has access to court. The latter is supplemented by Article 101, 103 and 104 of German Constitution, which prohibit creation of extraordinary courts and provides that everyone has a right to ‘the statutory judge’ and right to be heard. Moreover the Federal Constitutional Court perceives the rule of law clause as a source of the right to a fair trial. In general it is accepted in Germany that the constitutional standards refering to administration of justice satisfy international standards and in some cases even exceed them. Practical problems in their implementation concern mainly the right to have the case heard in a reasonable time.

Right to a fair trial in Italy

The access to justice is expressed directly in the part one of the Constitution of the Italian Republic of 1947, entitled “The rights and duties of citizens”. In accordance with Article 24 paragraph. 1 of the Constitution, “everyone can take judicial action to protect individual rights and legitimate interests”. It should be noted that it is a wide range of subjective and objective constitutional regulation, in particular, on the right of access to court, the right to defense and right to a fair and due process (Article 111 of the Constitution). The biggest disadvantages that arises from the functioning of the Italian justice system are multiple violations of the right to a trial within a reasonable time and the usage of the cassation, as a court of third instance. Many attempts to correct the Italian judiciary have been made, for example by the introduction of Pinto Law of 2001, which gives litigants the right to the compensation in case of excessively lengthy judicial proceedings. However, it did not have the expected effect of speeding up the court proceedings because of the lack of necessary judiciary reforms (complicated structures and a large number of courts, traditionally low court fees etc.). The impact of the Law was The result of the Law is further increase in the number of cases and budgetary costs. The inefficiency of Italian justice system is needed to be reformed.

Right to obtain the effective protection of the Judges and the Courts in the exercise of individual legitimate rights and interests – considerations about Art. 24 of Spanish Constitution

The right to the fair trial, also called in Spain as a “right-star” (derecho-estrella), is regarded as a basic and unalterable guarantee of human rights. It was regulated in detail in the Spanish Constitution, and is recognized as a set of legal guarantees. These guarantees – from the very beginning of the functioning of the Constitutional Court – were related to each phase and type of litigation. Thanks to the fast universalization of the right, this “right-star” is analyzed not only by the representatives of the doctrine of the constitutional law, but also of the procedural criminal law, the civil law and the administrative law. The greatest importance for the understanding the Spanish view of the right to the fair trial has the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court which for more than two decades has been interpreted dynamically the above mentioned right.

Polish Constitutional Tribunal towards European standards of the right to a fair trial

The Constitutional Tribunal (TK) does not exercise justice, however, it is a judicial authority. The right to request an examination of compatibility of the normative act with the Constitution is today an integral part of the democratic rule of law and the right to court. As the analysis of the case law of the Constitutional Tribunal shows, the Polish constitutional court applies the standards of the right to a fair trial established under the Convention and the Charter as well as refers to the case law of the European Courts including the interpretation of the relevant provisions of international law. This practice should be assessed unambiguously positive, because it leads to the creation of a common standard of protection of fundamental rights in the European Union. However respecting the ECHR case-law makes necessary to recognize that in proceedings related to the specific constitutional control before Constitutional Tribunal should be applied the guarantees arising from Art. 6 of the Convention. It is obvious that the TK as a court of law not facts cannot be treated as another instance of appeal and a constitutional complaint should not be used as an instrument for correcting mistakes made in the earlier stages of the proceedings. However, the constitutional position of TK among the judiciary, the legislative shape of the proceedings before the Tribunal, and finally the status of TK judges allow – in my opinion – to put forward the thesis of the need for abandonment of the European standards of the right to a fair trial before TK. Standards that according to the TK case law, are also guaranteed by the provisions of the Constitution.

The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania and European Standards of the Right to Court

The purpose of this article is to analyse the constitutional basis for the activity the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania and to represent the functions of this Court in respect of the harmonization of national and transnational defence mechanisms of human right to a fair trial. The article is divided into several basic parts: first of all, it shows the constitutional grounds for the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania, the creation and the relevant characteristics of its status and activities; later, the article discusses the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania, which analyses the right to a fair trial; the article ends with an assessment of the impact of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union for the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court while defending the right to a fair trial.

Direct application of Article 45 paragraph 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland

The problem of direct application of constitutional regulation is related to the role of the Constitution as a legal act in the legal system and the practice of its application. Article 45.1 of the Constitution is applied both by the Constitutional Tribunal and courts. In constitutional proceedings the Article is considered to be a standalone benchmark for establishing if the regulation is in accordance with the Constitution, whereas courts usually apply it jointly with given acts, interpreting them in such a way that leads to be within the Constitution. Direct application of Article 45.1 of the Constitution results in transmission of rules and requirements related to constitutional right to judgement (including a constitutional case) and ensuant guarantees to judicature.

The role of the administrative court in the process of dividing a commune into constituencies

The manner of determining the division of a commune into electoral constituencies and determining the number of seats per district is an expression of the implementation of the principle of equality of elections in a material sense. The proper division of a commune into constituencies is a guarantee of the equality of electoral law. The Electoral Code of 2011, originally stipulated that no legal remedy was available to the decisions of the National Electoral Commission issued as part of the verification of the provisions of the electoral commissioner. The Constitutional Tribunal, by a verdict of 6 April 2016, ruled that this regulation is unconstitution. The Act of January 11, 2018 introduced a two-instance control of the legality of the division of the commune into constituencies (before the provincial administrative court and before the Supreme Administrative Court). Subsequently, it was considered that, given that electoral activities related to the formation of constituencies and the change of their borders are covered by the electoral calendar and must be carried out without undue delay that the judicial review procedure should assume speed and efficiency of proceedings in this matter. The Act of June 15, 2018 amending the Act – Election Code and certain other acts amended the provisions on the jurisdiction and mode of judicial review of the electoral bodies’ acts on matters related to the creation of constituencies and on the deadline for lodging appeals and complaints to the court. Court proceedings in this matter have become one-instance, and complaints about resolutions of the National Electoral Commission regarding the division communes into electoral constituencies are to be recognized only by the Supreme Administrative Court. 

Is it possible to limit the judicial way of pursuing  rights and freedoms of the individual? – remarks relating  to art. 77 paragraph 2 of the Polish Constitution

This article is an attempt to answer the question of how far-reaching restrictions may be imposed by a state on pursuing rights and freedoms of the individual in front of the court. At the beginning of the article broad definition of the constitutional right to fair trial and special dimension of this right is emphasized. Introductory remarks are the starting point for determining whether there is a possibility of functioning of quasi-judicial organs. With regard to the permitted limitations on the subjective scope of the right to fair trial the author referred to the controversial judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal of 15th November 2000, in which the Tribunal refused to confront the restriction with the general limitation clause of the all constitutional rights and freedoms foreseen by the Constitution. The objective scope of the right to fair trial was connected with the issue of mutual relations between two provisions of the Constitution art. 45 p. 1 and art. 77 p. 2 and its incoherent interpretation. The case-law of the Constitutional Tribunal precludes the possibility of closing the judicial way of pursuing a claim without any reservation only for constitutional freedoms.

The subject of the study is to analyze EU citizens’ right to court in the light of the procedural regulations of the court of Justice and the General Court included in the CJEU Statute and court regulations. The study analyzes also, to a necessary extent, the body of previous judicial decisions of CJEU as well as the provisions of relevant acts of derivative law concerning the issues in question. Considering the complexity of the analyzed subject and the limitations of the size of the present study, the focus was put on questions related to legal aid and rules of representation. Upon through analysis, the study confirms that in proceedings before EU courts EU citizens have limited possibilities in the scope of the capacity to act in legal proceedings, which constitutes one of the most basic factors limiting their right to court.

Responsibility of the Judicial Power and Disciplinary Responsibility of Judges

Two circumstances: ineffective legal protection system and controversial cases of abandonment of enforcement of judges’ disciplinary liability have become a basis for justifying amendments to regulations on judges’ disciplinary liability. New solutions are characterised by, among other features, the limiting of the independence of the judiciary and subjecting it to increased control exercised by the legislature and the executive. The rationale behind these changes is to be sought for in a claim that courts of law are not a representative of the people which can be considered qual to the other authorities and that, therefore, having been abused by judges, the rights they have enjoyed hitherto (other than the administration of justice) should be constrained. Some judges and representatives of the jurisprudence reject this argumentation pointing out that rather than being conducive to the declared goals of improving the functioning of courts and of judges’ observance of law, the amendments result in the limiting of the citizen’s right to an independent tribunal. In these circumstances, a dispute has arisen over how a judge should act if the law on disciplinary liability prohibits their right to criticise or legally verify regulations depriving them of the guarantee of independence and impartiality. Do the statutable principles of disciplinary liability also determine all the principles of the judiciary liability? What if there is a difference of opinions between the representatives of the legislature and the executive versus those of the judiciary concerning an interpretation of the citizen’s right to a tribunal and of the notion of “independence of a tribunal”? Analysing the legal and doctrinal argumentation offered by both parties may facilitate answering these questions. This approach may also prove useful in determining whether enforcing the new principles of disciplinary liability will resolve the current crisis in the relationship between courts and the other authorities or, on the contrary, initiate its further stage.

Disciplinary Justice in the Context of Constitutional Restrictions

The purpose of this article is to analise the present formula of disciplinary responsibility of the judges in a context of the constitutional rules: independent of judges, independent of courts and right to a fair trial. The Author analises present legal status, as well practice and legal propositions of changes. By the way, he notices a dengerous tenden cy towards transgressing constitutional limits and infringement these regulations with the European Union’s law.

The subject of the article is the analysis of the provisions of the Art. 35 (2) of the Act on Local Referendum against the background of the Art. 31 (3) of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, creating the conditions for admissibility of formulating restrictions on the use of constitutionally specified provisions the rights and freedoms of the individual. The aim of the study is to determine whether the statutory regulation under review remains compliant with the constitutional principle of proportionality regarding the citizen’s right to a court. The main thesis is that the disposition of the Art. 35 (2) of the Local Referendum Act does not infringe the individual’s rights related to the pursuit of claims related to unreliable referendum campaigns.