The article discusses Polish social welfare within the context of the economic analysis of law. Specific issues addressed in the article are: cost, time, ways of setting matters, the number of issued decisions and the beneficiaries of social welfare in Poland. Following the presentation, the obvious question arises concerning the legitimacy of the use of certain solutions, particularly in the context of their financial performance. Reflections on the social care model used in Poland are presented in the article, as well as the crisis of law as part of the broader issue of the crisis of the modern Western democratic state.

Modernity understood as a permanent crisis of legitimacy and authority is a constant challenge for constitutionalism. The article reconstructs the danger of substituting political nature with moral imperatives. In modern societies, political disputes turn into so-called culture wars, and the dividing lines are marked by two moralities fighting each other: a liberal morality and a conservative morality. Using selected examples from the constitutional judiciary, I put forward a proposal of rethinking the definition of political nature in constitutionalism to deal with the crisis of legitimacy and authority that plagues it.

The study discusses the principles of awarding benefits under the Company Social Benefits Fund (original Polish name: Zakładowy Fundusz Świadczeń Społecznych) from the point of view of legitimacy of the processing of personal data. The con-ducted analysis covers the present legal framework in force in Poland, taking the European Union law – GDPR – into consideration. Given the local specificity of the institution in question, the article does not include references to regulations adopted in other countries. The article proposes two theses. One is that the award-ing of benefits under the CSBF with the participation of representatives of the stakeholder community, especially in the area of hardship benefits, should be based on anonymised applications. Documents proving the circumstances acting as the grounds to apply for a benefit to be true should be verified by an employer’s authorised representative in charge of employee welfare initiatives. The other thesis is that copies of documents proving the legitimacy of application for a social benefit, especially in the area of hardship benefits, should be kept by the data controller – meaning the employer – for a period during which Polish tax authori-ties and Social
Insurance Institution (ZUS) may verify the legitimacy of application of the impost law. In this case, this refers to the practice of non-payment of the tax on the awarded benefits and the social insurance contributions. The conclusions the said theses lead to are significant to the practical application of law, and because they are controversial, they may pave the way for a further academic discourse.

The inspiration behind the article is the two new provisions of the Polish Criminal Code, penalising the up to now unpunished behaviour leading up to murder, introduced by means of the Act of 13 June 2019 on the Amendment of the Act – Criminal Code and Certain Other Acts. Despite the doubts regarding the constitutionality of the act in question, it is reasonable to look into the mechanism of preparation to murder and contract killing, if only because of the fact that these solutions may return in further draft amendments to the Criminal Code. The analysed provisions has given rise to a more general reflection on the legitimacy of penalisation of preparation to murder in the light of contemporary indications of the theory of criminalisation. The discussion also features remarks on the already functioning types of prohibited acts, used, among others, to criminalise acts undertaken at the stage of preparation to murder. The conclusions have led to a demand for the adoption of a provision sanctioning an incomplete variant of preparation to murder and for a total abandonment of separate criminalisation of contract killing.

The aim of the article is to evaluate the draft of a new Family Code developed by the Social Codification Commission for Family and Guardianship Law attached to the Children’s Rights Ombudsman with regard to the advisability and legitimacy of the changes proposed in it, as well as to analyse its selected detailed solutions in the context of their impact on the protection of the child’s welfare. The aforemen tioned detailed issues concern, among others, the issues of parental custody and material and legal grounds for divorce. The proposed changes, namely the replacement of the institution of parental custody with “parental responsibility” and the introduction of a new divorce premise are perceived by the authors of the article as clearly negative.
The authors of the article are also critical of the procedure of preparation of the discussed draft. In their opinion, the applicable Family and Guardianship Code is not an anachronistic legal act and can and should continue to play the role of a basic regulator of legal and family relations in our country. The proposal to replace it with a new code is not sufficiently justified, either legally or socially, and its adoption may prove to be dangerous for the stability of the legal and family regula tions, shaped by the latest amendments to family law and contrary to the principle of protection of the best interests of the child.

The paper aims at reconstruction and critical discussion with the main tenets of political theory of adjudication, as presented by Rafał Mańko in his book, W stronę krytycznej filozofii orzekania. Polityczność, etyka, legitymizacja [Towards a Critical Philosophy of Adjudication. The Political, Ethics, Legitimacy]. In the paper, I demonstrate: that the interpretation of the concept crucial for the entire theory – which is the concept of political – has been chosen by Mańko in an ideological and a priori manner; that the choice above effectively prevents the realisation of the main objective of the book, which is to legitimise adjudication; that the adoption of the ethics of adjudication advocated in the book is – in the light of the basic assumptions of that very publication – both improbable and hardly acceptable. Finally, I claim that Mańko’s theory, due to its totality, can distinguish neither between legitimate law and violence, nor between justified and unjustified adjudication. As a result, it loses its critical force. All these problems are not peculiar to Mańko’s theory, but they are general weaknesses of various versions of critical jurisprudence.

The aim of the article is to evaluate the draft of a new Family Code developed by the Social Codification Commission for Family and Guardianship Law attached to the Children’s Rights Ombudsman with regard to the advisability and legitimacy of the changes proposed in it, as well as to analyse its selected detailed solutions in the context of their impact on the protection of the child’s welfare. The aforemen-tioned detailed issues concern, among others, the issues of parental custody and material and legal grounds for divorce. The proposed changes, namely the replace-ment of the institution of parental custody with “parental responsibility” and the introduction of a new divorce premise are perceived by the authors of the article as clearly negative.
The authors of the article are also critical of the procedure of preparation of the discussed draft. In their opinion, the applicable Family and Guardianship Code is not an anachronistic legal act and can and should continue to play the role of a basic regulator of legal and family relations in our country. The proposal to replace it with a new code is not sufficiently justified, either legally or socially, and its adoption may prove to be dangerous for the stability of the legal and family regula-tions, shaped by the latest amendments to family law and contrary to the principle of protection of the best interests of the child.

The article discusses a vital problem of the legal restrictions imposed on single-member limited liability companies under the provisions in force. In the first part of the text, the author explores the binding regulations applicable to single-member companies and arranges them in a way that it is possible to classify them within the legal framework. In the second part, the author deals with the legitimacy of existence of the said restrictions on the functioning of single-member companies, analyses the superficiality of application of particular solutions, and defines the most significant directions of changes necessary to abolish the restrictions imposed on single-member limited liability companies.