The study based on archival, published historical documents and other available information sources highlights the activity of sickness funds that functioned in Ukraine on the territory of modern Prykarpattia during the period of Polish rule in 1919–1939 (the Second Polish Republic, in Polish: II Rzeczpospolita Polska) as a prototype of health insurance. The analysis of these documents allows to deter-mine the peculiarities of the activity of these institutions in relations with society and the state, methods of financing, rights and obligations of the members of these organizations, specific features of the decision-making management, insurance cases and ways of compensation. The retrospective approach used in this study makes it possible to recreate the picture of the past in the field of health care in general and health insurance in particular, even with the lack of historical and legal sources of a certain historical period. Seeing the present through a peculiar prism of the past helps to dive into the inner life of the society with all its manife-stations and ideas contributing to better understanding of modern social processes. In other words, the longer you look back, the further you see ahead.

Everyone’s personal dignity guarantees freedoms and rights irrespective of age, which means that they also apply to the child. The rights of the child emphasise his or her subjectivity and draw attention to his or her special status determined, admittedly, by dependence on adults, but not without freedom. Emphasising the rights of the child is a kind of compensation for the child’s legal situation due to his/her physical and mental immaturity and dependence. However, every human being, including the child, has duties in addition to rights, which remain in relative balance. In this way, they contribute to the formation of the child’s personality in a balanced way. Limiting oneself exclusively to rights and at the same time margi-nalising duties leads to a disturbance of this balance, the formation of attitudes of entitlement towards others, teaches laziness and lives at the expense of others. As it seems, it is therefore necessary to restore the balance between highlighting children’s rights and depreciating their duties.

In this article, the Polish institution of administrative entry to the area in order to carry out repair, maintenance or removal of failures of transmission equipment will be presented. It entitles to public-law interference in the constitutionally protected property right, under the condition that the determinants of its application have been met. The aim of the analysis is to indicate that the expropriation nature of this regulation, which is a specific form of expropriation, requires a strict interpretation of the premises leading to the restriction of the ownership for purposes related to transmission activity. An attempt will be made to demonstrate that the restriction of the ownership made on the basis of an administrative decision meets the expropriation standards applicable in the Polish legal system. The presented issues are not only of purely theoretical importance, but will also be used in the application of legal regulations by both public administration authorities and transmission companies applying for a permission.

The article deals with the problem of modal inference: if some addressees are
obliged to do something, they are also obliged to realize states of affairs which
constitute a necessary condition for the main obligation. Likewise, they are obliged
to refrain from realizing states of affairs which constitute a sufficient condition for
the action contradicting the main obligation. This type of inference is called in Polish legal theory “instrumental inference”. It is argued in the article that sometimes instrumental norms in law must be fulfilled (“preparatory actions” must be undertaken) before the main obligation is fulfilled. Lawgiver helps addressees of norms by applying vacatio legis. It can lead to new paradoxical consequences – to the creation of “virtual norms” – norms which never come into force, but addressees are obliged to undertake preparatory actions. The article presents theoretical
description of this phenomenon. In conclusion one dogmatic claim is proposed:
there is a potential way (art. 4171 § 1 k.c.) of getting from public officials compensation for preparatory actions which caused burden for addressees, when the main obligation turned out to be “virtual”. In Poland this procedure should be based on the rulings of the Constitutional Tribunal.

Abstract The question of compensation of Polish citizens for their property left beyond the Bug river after the population exchanges is among the most complex social, economical and legal issues resulting from the World War II to be solved by the Polish State. Although more than 70 years have passed since this issue has arisen, it remains the subject of numerous national and European court rulings and legislative actions; the significance of the legal solution of the described issue is bolstered by the fact that it is being treated as a “proving ground” for the broader question of reprivatisation. This article focuses on the current Act of 8 July 2005 which was aimed at providing a final solution for settling the claims. However, during the last few years of this act in operation numerous questions and disputes have arisen leading to more than 600 administrative court and Constitutional Tribunal rulings. The subject of this article will be focused on current controversies regarding the subject including the requirements of residence on the former territory of Poland on 1 September 1939, exclusion of non- Polish nationals who are heirs to property owners from entitlement to compensation and legal consequences of nationalization by Soviet authorities during World War II and its aftermath.

Evidencing in medical trials for damages is difficult, and it requires not only knowledge in the field of law, but also in the field of medicine. The main impediment to fluent proceeding in medical matters which requires to be strongly emphasised is a vast difficulty for courts in taking evidence by an expert within reasonable time. Such evidence is generally necessary in every case because there is a necessity to learn medical facts from the perspective of specialist knowledge (Article 278 § 1 of CPC). The problematic nature of damages for so called medical errors has gained more and ore significance, both because of the growing number of claims and the damages paid in relation thereto and the rising costs of insurance against those events incurred by healthcare centers. In such legal circumstances, it is worth indicating the extent to which the evidence by an expert doctor is taken in medical proceedings and the significance thereof for a proper course of the proceedings. Nevertheless, frequently opinions by experts are rather far from being objective. Often, as a result of falsely interpreted solidarity of representatives of the profession, experts disregard the lack of knowledge and diligence of a doctor and the organisational omissions in health care centers. Their opinions are very often unclear ambiguous, posing different hypotheses and the possibilities of damage which do not assist the court in properly assessing the events in matters for compensation. Because of that, a higher standard of conduct for expert doctors should be considered, the manner in which they are appointed and an improvement of the effectiveness of their work

Among the institutions adopted from Roman law whose historical evolution within ius commune is particularly interesting, it is worth pointing out the issues connected with the distribution of damage incurred as a result of throwing a part of the cargo overboard from a ship due to the risk of its sinking because of overload. Deliberations of Roman lawyers, gathered under the title De lege Rhodia de iactu, were object of medieval jurists’ creative interpretation. The role of the glossators’ school representatives seems to be particularly significant here as an important contribution to the development of the European legal doctrine in subsequent centuries. In the modern era, the innovations introduced by representatives of this school were considered communis opinio doctorum and it was applied in legal practice of the Imperial Chamber Court of the Reich. Its purpose was compensation for any damage incurred in joint interest or in other people’s interest, which was reflected in the content of ABGB, the Polish Civil Code and Roman-Dutch Law.