This article is a contribution to the biography of Professor Andrzej Kabat – a prose-cutor, legal counsel, judge of the highest courts of the Republic of Poland, and a long-time academic teacher. The study discusses selected jurisprudential achieve-ments of Professor Andrzej Kabat from the period when he held the office of a judge of the Constitutional Tribunal and the Supreme Administrative Court. Moreover, there are also references to his research on the institution of questions of law sub-mitted to the Constitutional Tribunal, which is regarded as pioneering in the science of law, despite the fundamental changes in the political system. What marks the discussed output of Professor Kabat is both the relevance of his ideas and the great significance for the practice of application of the law.

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.

W glosowanym orzeczeniu Sąd Najwyższy potwierdził możliwość modyfikacji wynagrodzenia ryczałtowego poza przypadkami opisanymi w art. 632 § 2 k.c. w sytuacji przedmiotowo istotnej zmiany zakresu świadczenia wykonawcy. Nie poddano natomiast szerszej analizie kwestii prawnej doniosłości nieformalnych uzgodnień między stronami co do zmiany treści zobowiązania oraz istnienia obowiązku formalnej zmiany umowy w takich okolicznościach. Ponadto Sąd Najwyższy odmówił zakwalifikowania umowy typu „zaprojektuj i wybuduj” jako umowy o roboty budowlane, uznając ją za umowę mieszaną. Niniejsza glosa stanowi komentarz do stanowiska Sądu Najwyższego w powyższych kwestiach, przy czym w zakresie pierwszego problemu jest to komentarz aprobujący, odnośnie zaś do dwóch pozostałych krytyczny.