The aim of the article is to present to international researchers the Polish model of legal regulation regarding civil court mediation. The second aim is to present an assessment of the effectiveness of these legal solutions. For these purposes, the article discusses said legal regulations and then follows up with a review of statistical data on the use of mediation in court proceedings. This leads to the assessment of the effectiveness of the presented legal model. The research concludes that despite the significant social need and the extensiveness of the legal regulation in force, the use of mediation in Poland remains at very low level and is not developing. Research shows that there are – not yet identified –reasons that hinder the development of mediation in Poland. Therefore, this article also aims to show which regulatory model does not work or, in other words, which regulatory model is not sufficient to develop civil court mediation in Poland – and maybe in other jurisdictions.

Following a complaint to an administrative court by two judges, the Prime Minister used the self-revision procedure and revoked his countersignature of the Presi-dent’s official act. This is a true precedent in the history of Polish constitutionalism. Yet, the permissibility of judicial review of presidential acts performed in individual cases should not give rise to any doubts. This is because such acts are subject to the general control regime set forth in the Act of 30 August 2002 – Law on Proceed-ings before Administrative Courts. What we can learn from other judicial systems indicates that the acts of central executive authorities are not, with some exceptions, exempt from such supervision. An analysis of the judicial decisions of, for instance, the Supreme Administrative Court of the Czech Republic, which recognises its jurisdiction over appointments of judges serves as a convincing example.

The judicial review of administrative courts covers the legality of acts and actions of public administration bodies. The oversight over the activities of bodies of other authorities is, therefore, excluded from this review. However, there are cases in which administrative courts, invoking the so-called pro-constitutional interpre-tation, attempt to extend their jurisdiction also to be able to review the acts, actions or inactions of legislative and judicial authorities. Despite the fact that according to the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, the executive power (equated by legal scholars, commentators, and practitioners with the exercise of public administra-tion) is exercised by the President of the Republic of Poland and the Council of Ministers, the dominant judicial practice is that the acts of the President, which constitute the exercise of his prerogatives, are not subject to the jurisdiction of administrative courts. The author argues against this practice.
The discussion addresses also the demands and proposals made in the litera-ture dealing with the subject for entrusting administrative courts with the review of decisions issued in social insurance cases, as well as the establishment of a separate judiciary in tax or – more broadly – financial cases. The author strongly opposes these demands and proposals as well.

The analysis offered in this paper explores the legal definition of civil status and points out the different meanings of this concept in the basic branches of law as well as its relevance to the application in Poland of the norms of the Act of 28 November 2014 – Vital Records Law. The essence of vital records has also been considered. The discussion addresses the administrative-legal nature of civil status registration activities, highlighting their permissible legal forms. This is followed by a review of the most important features and scope of judicial review exercised by common and administrative courts, which serves as the background for an evalua-tion of the dispersed judicial review. The conclu sion offers de lege ferenda proposals relating to a uniform model of judicial review of civil status registration activities.

This article examines the jurisdictional status of the internet. Because of the underly-ing nature of technology, nations cannot effectively monitor online transactions that originate or conclude within their borders. Governments can seek to enforce their laws within the constraints of their physical, geographical, and political domains as defined by an atlas, but a borderless cyberworld regulated by fast--expanding technology has a variety of challenges. This study sheds light on those challenges, the jurisdiction for parties to suit, the remedies accessible to them, and the territorial concerns discussed in various domestic courts. It also focuses on the pressures on stakeholders to act, as well as the economic, human rights, and techno-logical infrastructure implications of jurisdictional concerns. In general, jurisdictional issues on the internet have resulted in haphazard and unrestricted jurisdictional implementations, and this article emphasizes the territorial difficulties of internet administration and its direct influence on many nations and elements.

This article discusses the independent state legislature theory, which has been the subject of interest of an ever-growing group of American constitutionalists in recent years. This theory deals primarily with state legislatures’ power – derived directly from the US Constitution – to regulate federal elections. According to its underlying premises, this fact results in the absence of any tools to control the law enacted in this area as to its compliance with a given state’s constitution. Neither the electoral administration nor the state courts can interfere with these laws. They would therefore be subject to federal courts’ review only. However, the Supreme Court, in applying the political questions doctrine, has excluded many election law matters – other than those concerning funding – from its jurisdiction. As a result, such an important part of state law – one concerning fundamental political rights – would remain without any supervision inherent in modern democraci

This article discusses the independent state legislature theory, which has been the subject of interest of an ever-growing group of American constitutionalists in recent years. This theory deals primarily with state legislatures’ power – derived directly from the U.S. Constitution – to regulate federal elections. According to its underlying premises, this fact results in the absence of any tools to control the law enacted in this area as to its compliance with a given state’s constitution. Neither the electoral administration nor the state courts can interfere with these laws. They would therefore be subject to federal courts’ review only. However, the Supreme Court, in applying the political questions doctrine, has excluded many election law matters – other than those concerning funding – from its jurisdiction. As a result, such an important part of state law – one concerning fundamental political rights – would remain without any supervision inherent in modern democracies.

Fixed establishment (FE) is one of the institutions of the EU value added tax system; its structure is essential to correctly determine the right tax jurisdiction of an EU Member State for the purpose of VAT settlement in situations of cross-border provision of services. However, the legal structure of a FE adopted by the EU legislator (and, consequently, adapted to national legislation of the Member States) causes uncertainty when it comes to its interpretation. In the absence of unambiguously defined conditions in EU law to consider a specific presence and activity of an enterprise to be a FE, interpretation rules contained in judicial decisions
issued by the Court of Justice of the EU play an important role. Among attempts
made by the CJEU to clarify the ‘blur areas’ resulting from the dynamics of modern
business processes, one of the most interesting ones is the possibility of considering
a subsidiary to be a fixed establishment for a parent company. The purpose of this
paper is to analyse legal and economic factors, the fulfilment of which may constitute a condition for considering a subsidiary to be a fixed establishment for
a parent company, with particular emphasis on the ruling of the Court of Justice
of 7 May 2020 in the Dong Yang case (C-547/18).

The Act of 17 December 2009 on pursuing claims in class actions regulating court proceedings in cases which involve claims of at least 10 people, is a kind of novelty in Polish law. Undoubtedly, it is a legal act improving and modernizing Polish civil proceedings. However, one should pay attention to new developments and the lack of their clarification, and therefore to the importance of already issued judgments of the Supreme Court. For this reason, existing jurisdiction on this subject has been presented and analyzed, which allows to precise the subjective scope, the term and extent of the unification of claims, as well as the concept and requirement of a representative of the collective. Without any doubts, the practice, which starts to shape, as indicated on the example of jurisdiction, will allow to clarify the scope of the subject and object of the Act. The ability to limit the claims for liability of the defendant has, without any doubts, a very important role in functioning of the class action, because the unification of pecuniary claims is in practice very difficult. Past court decisions show that unification should be understood as occurrence of a members’ request for the generically same forms of protection. Many practical problems are also raised by the concept of the representative of the collective, and the way, in which the collective should choose one.