Wyniki wyszukiwania - Biblioteka Nauki

1

Prawo właściwe dla odpowiedzialności za szkodę wyrządzoną przez produkt według art. 5 Rzym II

100%

Machnikowski P.

Kwartalnik Prawa Prywatnego

|

2015

|

tom 24

|

nr 4

817-848

EN

Damage caused by a product is one of five examples of liability in tort excluded from the scope of application of the general rule (Art. 4) of Rome II Regulation and treated differently. A justification for this decision is that damage resulting from a product is frequently a multilocal or complex tort - the event giving rise to damage occurs in a different time and place than the damage itself. Thus the criterion adopted in Art. 4 for determining the applicable law, that is, the place where the damage occured, should not be applied to damage resulting from a product, as this would lead to arbitrary conclusions which would be unforeseeable to liable persons, and which would also often turn out to be surprising and unfavourable for the victim. The full harmonization of the law of product liability undertaken in the European Union is only a partial solution to the conflict of law issue, because the Rome II Regulation governs conflicts of law where non-EU countries are also involved and the regulation in the Product Liability Directive is limited in its subjective scope, leaving the product liability laws of the Member States to some extent unharmonized. This article discusses objectives of the provisions contained in Art. 5 of the Rome II Regulation and specific problems of its interpretation such as the concept of ‘product liability’ and ‘damage caused by a product’ for the purpose of conflict of laws rules, the meaning of the requirement of marketing of the product in a certain country as well as types and hierarchy od connections provided in Art. 5 of Rome II Regulation.

2

Scope of application of the generał rule in the Rome II Regulation

70%

Wasylkowska-Michór M.

Acta Iuris Stetinensis

|

2020

|

tom 30

|

nr 2

89-106

EN

The purpose of the paper is to determine the scope of application of Article 4(1), which con- stitutes the general rule of the Rome II Regulation concerning the law applicable to non- contractual obligations. Article 4(1) says that: unless otherwise provided for in this Regula¬tion, the law applicable to a non-contractual obligation arising out of a tort/delict shall be the law of the country in which the damage occurs. However, this rule is subject to numerous exceptions, which the author divided into three groups: 1) exceptions resulting from the structure of Article 4 (Article 4(2) - common habitual residence in the same country, and Article 4(3) - escape clause), 2) exceptions resulting from the whole Regulation (Articles 5 to 9 - separate regulations for different types of tort, Articles 10 to 12 - separate regulations for non-contractual obligations, Article 14 - freedom of choice, Article 16 - overriding man- datory provisions, Article 17 - rules of safety and conduct), 3) restrictions resulting from other acts of EU and international law (the Hague Convention of 4 May 1971 on the Law Applicable to Traffic Accidents). The analysis resulted is the thesis that Article 4(1) of the Regulation applies to a few types of cases (mainly traffic accidents), which, however, happen quite frequently. The author of the paper refers to the provisions of law (analysis of existing legal regulations), as well as to literature based on these provisions, and therefore uses the dogmatic and legal methods of scientific research.

3

Prawo właściwe dla dóbr osobistych i ich ochrony

60%

Pilich M.

Kwartalnik Prawa Prywatnego

|

2012

|

tom 21

|

nr 3

599-650

EN

The issue of international protection of personality rights has become important in the recent public debate taking place in Poland and other European countries. Because of failed attempts to introduce an appropriate conflicts rule to the EU Regulation on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II), the Polish lawgiver has decided to establish Article 16 of Polish Private International Law Act of February 4, 2011, which specifies the law applicable to both the rights of personality (paragraph 1) and to the protection of such rights (paragraph 2). Additional conflicts rule in the paragraph 3 of the above-mentioned Article relates to the law applicable to the right of the reply, correction, and other similar means provided by the press laws. The article is devoted to a detailed analysis of the regulation in the context of the comparative law (taking into account esp. the Italian, French, German, and Swiss private international law). The author argues that the distinction between the law applicable to personality rights as a kind of the “preliminary question” and the law applicable to the protection of the said rights has been unnecessary and it only makes the use of private international law rules more complicated. Moreover, the structure of Article 16 paragraph 16 of Polish PIL Act, granting the choice between the law of the State in which the threat or violation of personality rights takes place and the law of the State in which the effects of that event occurred, is silent on the cases where the victim did not express any such will as to the applicable law. The analysis is focused on the interpretation of the rules and their practical application. The author analyses also the prospects for the future amendment to the Rome II Regulation concerning the law applicable to the violations of privacy and rights of personality. He is of the opinion, that in spite of the initiative of the European Parliament of the year 2012, such an amendment seems to be rather uncertain because of the deep institutional crisis of the European Union.

4

W poszukiwaniu prawa właściwego dla cywilnoprawnych roszczeń odszkodowawczych z tytułu naruszenia RODO (art. 82 RODO)

60%

Jagielska M. , Jagielski M.

Problemy Prawa Prywatnego Międzynarodowego

|

2021

|

tom 28

51-73

EN

The main purpose of this study is to determine which conflict of law rules constitute the basis for the search for the law applicable to private-law compensation claims provided for in Article 82 of the GDPR, and whether it is possible to apply the Rome II Regulation on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations in this regard. The authors first set out the main features of the claim, with particular emphasis on those areas where discrepancies may arise at the level of national law. They then qualify the claim as a tortious one, which leads them to pose a question about the applicability of the Rome II Regulation in this case. Special attention is given to the relationship between privacy and personal data protection. The authors argue that these two spheres have become gradually separated from each other and finally, under GDPR, claims for damages for a breach of personal data protection being independent of claims for an infringement of personal rights. Consequently, they assume that the law applicable to a claim under Article 82 of the GDPR should be indicated on the basis of the Rome II Regulation, despite the doubts arising from the exclusion provided for in Article 1.2.g Rome II. If approach is accepted, it will have significant consequences for the harmonisation of the application of the GDPR in the EU Member States, and for achieving the harmonisation of decisions at the level of national law.

5

Stosowanie deliktowych łączników lokalnych do zdarzeń mających miejsce na pokładzie statku morskiego lub powietrznego w unijnym prawie prywatnym międzynarodowym

57%

Dyrda Ł.

Problemy Prawa Prywatnego Międzynarodowego

|

2019

|

tom 24

109-139

EN

The article is aimed at determining the relevance of the flag state (regarding vessels) and the country of registration (regarding aircrafts) principles for the purpose of the application of territorial connecting factors (the place of the event giving rise to damage (place of acting) and the place where the damage occurred (place of damage)) employed by article 7(2) of the Regulation No 1215/2012 (Brussels I bis Regulation) providing a special jurisdiction rule in matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict and by article 4(1) of the Regulation No 864/2007 (Rome II Regulation) specifying the law applicable to a non-contractual obligation arising out of a tort or delict. The flag state and the country of registration principles could be taken into account when circumstances constituting the event giving rise to damage or the damage itself are situated on board of a vessel navigating in or an aircraft flying through the areas outside the sovereignty of any state (in particular the High Seas). The reference to the flag state or the country of registration instead of the sovereignty in order to identify the member state whose courts have jurisdiction pursuant to article 7(2) of the Brussels I bis Regulation or the statewhose law is applicable according to article 4(1) of the Rome II Regulation may also be possible in cases when the determination of the place where the event giving rise to damage occurred or where the damage occurred is difficult or even when the competent jurisdiction and the applicable law identified based on the sovereignty over the area where the vessel navigated or the aircraft flew at the moment when the event giving rise to damage occurred or damage occurred does not materialise the closest connection principle.

6

Prawo właściwe dla skargi pauliańskiej

51%

Ciaptacz J.

Kwartalnik Prawa Prywatnego

|

2020

|

tom 29

|

nr 2

285-323

EN

This paper discusses actio pauliana from a private international law perspective. Its aim is to determine which law governs the creditor’s right to avoid fraudulent transactions between the debtor and a third party. The methodology employed in this paper is based on the assessment of possible solutions as to the law applicable to actio pauliana. The legal framework of these solutions encompasses Rome I Regulation, Rome II Regulation and the Polish Private International Law Act. The analysis is preceded by references to international insolvency law and comparative remarks. The article leads to the following conclusions. For the purpose of classification in private international law, actio pauliana constitutes a separate and autonomous legal institution. The provisions currently in force contain no explicit rule regulating this issue, but the gap is to be filled with a norm adopting the closest connection as a connecting factor. Consequently, actio pauliana is governed by the law applicable to the effects of a fraudulent transaction.