- Author:
Aleksandra Szydzik
- E-mail:
aleksandra.szydzik@ug.edu.pl
- Institution:
University of Gdańsk
- ORCID:
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3744-859X
- Year of publication:
2020
- Source:
Show
- Pages:
177-189
- DOI Address:
https://doi.org/10.15804/ppk.2020.05.13
- PDF:
ppk/57/ppk5713.pdf
The paper aims at analyzing the phenomenon of judicial activism in Poland against the background of a resolution of the formation of the combined Civil Chamber, Criminal Chamber and Labor Law and Social Security Chamber of the Supreme Court of 23 January 2020 (BSA I-4110-1/20). The author discusses the Supreme Court’s powers to resolve divergences in the interpretation of law and then provides an analysis of the nature of the resolution of the Supreme Court. The considerations made in the context of the paper lead to the conclusion that in situations of a threat to the rule of law the courts not only have a right but also an obligation to take active measures to protect the common good.
- Author:
Natalie Fox
- E-mail:
natalie.fox@uj.edu.pl
- Institution:
Jagiellonian University in Krakow
- ORCID:
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4513-7997
- Year of publication:
2022
- Source:
Show
- Pages:
499-510
- DOI Address:
https://doi.org/10.15804/ppk.2022.06.37
- PDF:
ppk/70/ppk7037.pdf
The flexible formula of the British Constitution results in a relative openness to external influences. Notwithstanding this fact, the United Kingdom’s (UK’s) membership in the European Union’s (EU’s) structures (1973–2020) resulted in a progressive limitation of the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty. Brexit will not reverse the effects of the ‘soft’ modification of the foundations of the UK’s system, which occurred in the sphere of the practical implementation of the competencies of the branches of governance. Prima facie, the decision on the UK’s withdrawal from the EU should result in a ‘renaissance’ of the traditional doctrine of Westminster sovereignty, per A.V. Dicey. However, judicial activism, continued validity of the European Convention on Human Rights (incorporated on the basis of Human Rights Act 1998) and the irreversible consequences of the devolution of competencies in the UK for Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are the factors that hinder the possible revitalisation of the sovereignty of the British Parliament.
- Author:
Natalie Fox
- E-mail:
natalie.fox@uj.edu.pl
- Institution:
Jagiellonian University in Krakow
- ORCID:
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4513-7997
- Year of publication:
2024
- Source:
Show
- Pages:
229-239
- DOI Address:
https://doi.org/10.15804/ppk.2024.04.18
- PDF:
ppk/80/ppk8018.pdf
In recent years, the United Kingdom has seen a growing doctrinal discourse around competing models of legal and political constitutionalism. The situation has been exacerbated by ongoing changes in both theory and practice, which have engendered a strong conviction that the UK is now departing from the political constitutionalism associated with the traditional model of parliamentary sovereignty, in which Parliament’s legislative power is unlimited by law and the courts have no right to question the validity of laws on substantive grounds. From a theoretical point of view, legal constitutionalists contributed to provoking this change while desiring to continue to promote it by moving almost completely and exclusively towards legal constitutionalism, thus supplanting its political formula. From a practical point of view, however, one should bear in mind that the events that led to a specific change in thinking about British constitutionalism encompass, in particular, the legal consequences resulting from the UK’s membership in the European Union, including the phenomenon of the so-called judicial activism. Nevertheless, these events were also induced by the expansion and strengthening of judicial review of administrative actions, judicial shaping of the principle of legality, as well as by the enactment and application of the Human Rights Act 1998.
- Author:
Dmytro Skrynka
- E-mail:
d.skrynka@uw.edu.pl
- Institution:
University of Warsaw (Poland)
- ORCID:
https://orcid.org/0009-0005-8714-3235
- Year of publication:
2025
- Source:
Show
- Pages:
19-37
- DOI Address:
https://doi.org/10.15804/ppsy202502
- PDF:
ppsy/54-1/ppsy2025102.pdf
The WTO dispute settlement system crisis is an important milestone in the history of international law. Since the realist school in the study of international relations is known for its attention to the limits of the functions of international law, it is quite appropriate to review the key concepts of the realist school relevant to the current crisis. The ambitious endeavor to minimize the use of political methods of dispute settlement in international trade disputes within the institutional system of the WTO has not been quite successful. As postulated by realists, the political processes prevailed over the international legal procedures. In this article, based on the realist approach, the causes of the stalemate of the WTO dispute settlement system are analyzed, and recommendations are presented for remedying the current situation. The comparative analysis method is used for this. The article translates the relevant concepts of international relations by key realists, including the classification of international disputes by Hans Morgenthau, into specific recommendations for resolving the ongoing crisis.