Rafał Mańko

Wzrastające zainteresowanie uwikłaniem zjawisk prawnych w polityczność uzasadnia potrzebę podjęcia badań nad stosunkiem nauk prawnych do przedmiotowego zjawiska. Artykuł, mający w założeniu charakter przyczynkarski, podejmuje - z perspektywy metodologicznej jurysprudencji krytycznej (crticial jurisprudence) - próbę odpowiedzi na pytanie, w jaki sposób z problemem polityczności radzą sobie dwie subdyscypliny nauki prawa - analityczna teoria prawa oraz dogmatyka prawnicza.

Celem niniejszego artykułu jest podjęcie refleksji nad presupozycjami ontologicznymi krytycznej nauki o prawie (prawoznawstwa krytycznego), rozumianymi jako zbiór założeń z zakresu ontologii społecznej, wyznaczających tożsamość tej formy ogólnej refleksji nad prawem. Artykuł postuluje wyróżnienie czterech takich założeń: założenie o polityczności świata społecznego, założenie o społecznym tworzeniu świata społecznego, założenie o paninterpretacjonizmie, założenie o istnieniu
wspólnot interpretacyjnych.

Legal taxonomy – the operation of grouping legal systems or legal  cultures within larger groups, known as ‘legal families’ – is purportedly a neutral exercise based on objective features of the legal cultures or systems in question. The paper questions this assumption, arguing that legal taxonomy is political: it involves symbolic violence vis-à-vis the legal cultures in question, imposing upon them a given interpretation based on arbitrary criteria. As a result, the discourse of legal taxonomy promotes hegemony of certain legal cultures over other ones, and has the effect of discursively disciplining the subaltern members of legal families. However, despite this critique the paper argues that the discourse of legal taxonomy should not be abandonend altogether, but rather strategically reshaped to further the interests of the peripheral subaltern. Specifically, with regard to the legal cultures of Central Europe, the paper argues that the existence of a Central European Legal Family should be firmy asserted, as opposed to the mainstream narrative of Central Europe’s alleged ‘return’ to the Romanic or Germanic Legal Families, respectively.

Niniejszy artykuł stawia sobie za cel udzielenie odpowiedzi na pytanie, czy, a jeśli tak, to kiedy, można powiedzieć, że dane orzeczenie sądowe należy do sfery polityczności, tzn. że mamy do czynienia z orzeczniczą decyzją polityczną. Za punkt wyjścia praca przyjmuje pojęcie polityczności rozumianej jako wymiar agonizmu w ujęciu belgijskiej filozofki polityki Chantal Mouffe, w nawiązaniu do prac Carla Schmitta. Pytanie badawcze sprowadza się więc do relacji pomiędzy jurydycznością (rozumianą jako fenomen prawny) a politycznością w odniesieniu do podstawowej praktyki społecznej, w jakiej przejawia się fenomen jurydyczności, to jest praktyki orzekania.

In the context of the renaissance of critical legal theory and in particular its growing popularity in Central and Eastern Europe, the paper aims at a preliminary metatheoretical enquiry concerning the identity of critical legal science. In particular, the paper enquires about the identity of critique as applied in critical legal science, as well as about the method and object of that critique. It also highlights the importance of the triangular relationship between the juridical, the political and ideology as the central theme of critical legal science.

Niniejsza praca jest pierwszą w polskiej nauce próbą spojrzenia na zjawisko orzekania – sądowego stosowania prawa, w tym jego operatywnej wykładni – w perspektywie krytycznej filozofii prawa. Nawiązując do czołowych przedstawicieli tego nurtu w jurysprudencji anglosaskiej (m.in. Duncan Kennedy, Costas Douzinas, Adam Gearey), autor konstuuje własny model filozoficznoprawny, który określa mianem krytycznej filozofii orzekania. Wychodząc od założeń ontologicznych, epistemologicznych i metodologicznych teorii krytycznej, za kluczowy punkt wyjścia praca uznaje uwzględnienie w teorii orzekania problematyki polityczności (the political), rozumianej, za Chantal Mouffe, jako fundamentalny i niesuwalny antagonizm społeczny, oraz ideologii rozumianej w nawiązaniu w szczególności do koncepcji Slavoja Žižka. Autor nawiązuje też krytycznie do juryscentrycznego projektu Artura Kozaka prowadząc m.in. rozważania nad granicami prawniczej władzy dyskrecjonalnej.
Odsłonięcie politycznych i ideologicznych uwikłań orzekania skłania do przemyślenia na nowo etyki sędziowskiej, która – zdaniem Autora – powinna być oparta na imperatywie dążenia do sprawiedliwości, rozumianej nie jako dająca się skodyfikować formuła, ale przede wszystkim jako usuwanie przejawów niesprawiedliwości (adikia) i aktywne dążenie do emancypacji. Tak rozumiana polityczna etyka orzekania jest propozycją krytycznego przemyślenia społecznej odpowiedzialności sędziego i jego związków z prawem, a zarazem punktem wyjścia do rozważań o legitymizacji władzy sądowniczej. Skoro nie może ona znaleźć oparcia w tekście prawa i nie powinna jej szukać w innych subświatach, rozwiązaniem wydaje się jej oparcie na demokratycznej partycypacji i rzeczywistym dążeniu do realizacji ideału sprawiedliwości.

The aim of the present paper is to contribute to promoting a discourse of Central and Eastern European legal identity, underscoring the legal-cultural bonds of legal cutlure in the region, based on a common past, a common juridico-political mentality and a common present predicament. To this end, the paper posits regarding Central Europe as being a legal family in its own right, distinct both from other legal families in Europe. The paper contends that legal taxonomy is a matter of social construction of reality and has a disciplining function. Considering the ‘death and burial’ of the Socialist Legal Family as the founding myth of Central European regional juridical identity, the paper posits the succession of the former by two coexisting legal families: the Central European and the Eastern European/Eurasian ones. However, the paper does not intend to give definitive answers to the questions of legal taxonomy of the post-Soviet/post-socialist juridical space; its ambition is more moderate – to put forward a number of arguments in favour of a Central European legal family with the intent of destabilising the hegemonic ‘return to Europe’ approach and fostering a discussion of comparatists, legal theorists and socio-legal scientists focused on the problem of legal identity of our region.

Discussions concerning the continuity or discontinuity of the legal culture require the elaboration of a rigorous framework, allowing the comparison of hypotheses and findings concerning different periods, legal systems and branches of law. The present paper aims at identifying four fundamental aspects of the possible continuity or discontinuity of law in the positivist sense, therefore only a part of legal culture. The paper proposes four such dimensions: structure, conceptual framework, fundamental principles, institutions and rules. The propositions put forward in the paper are grounded in, and tentatively applied to, Polish private law after the 1989 transformation from state socialism to capitalism.

Celem niniejszego artykułu jest podjęcie rozważań nad ideologicznymi podstawami kultury europejskiego prawa prywatnego. Artykuł grupuje takie idee w przeciwstawne pary, wskazując na dominację neofunkcjonalizmu nad podejściem systemowym, pragmatyzmu nad formalizmem, instrumentalizmu nad autonomią, technokratyzmu nad demokratyzmem, liberalizmu nad sprawiedliwością społeczną, konsumeryzmu nad obywatelskością oraz integracjonizmu nad suwerennością

Tomasz Giaro coined the term “modernisation through transfer” to  describe the process of a wholesale reception of Western European law in Central Europe in the 19th and early 20th century. Undoubtedly, the concept correctly described the process. The enquiry of the present paper focuses on whether legal transfers in today’s Europe can also be explained by the same paradigm or are there differences. This preliminary study focuses on private law only and attempts at illustrating the problem by resorting to three concrete case studies: unfair terms, consumer sales and supply of digital content. It concludes that whilst in the 19th century the dynamics of legal transfers was characterised by bilateralism (donor state-recipient state) and by one-sidedness
(reception only), today’s legal transfers in Europe are characterised by
multilateralism (inclusion of European law as an intermediate player), multidimensionalism and two-sidedness (the donor state become ultimatey also a recipient state). Nonetheless, the centre-periphery dynamic plays its role as is illustrated by the lack of legal transfers originating from Central Europe. This latter element is a strong aspect of continuity with the 19th centry “modernisation through transfer” – Central Europe still is only a recipient of legal models.

The paper aims at analysing the role of law in systemic transformation on the example of Poland’s move from Actually Existing Socialism (1944–1989) to capitalism. For this purpose four case studies are analysed: the lex Wilczek liberalizing economic activity, the privatization laws of 1987 and 1990, the Round Table areements of April 1989 and, finally, the establishment of the Constitutional Court (1986). On the basis of each case study, a certain order of causation is established. Drawing on similarities identified between the four case studies, the paper draws the conclusion that in the first phase of transformation, the law was instrumentalised by political decision-makers, motivated by economic factors, in order to bring about changes in the social reality. However, once the law was put into motion, a new dynamic emerged in which the law started to play an independent role. Referring to recent research by Bruno Schönfelder, the paper concludes that this growing autonomy of the law can be seen as the essence of post-socialist transformation as such.

The paper claims that the form vs. substance dichomoty is relevant for the study of legal continuity, however, only provided that the notion of ‘form’ refers to the ‘form of law,’ and the notion of ‘substance’ refers to the socio-economic reality which the law strives to regulate. Therefore, the study of legal continuity despite a socio-economic transformation is, ultimately, the study of interaction between the (unchanged) form and (changed) substance.

Technocratic law inflicts symbolic violence on human subjects by imposing upon them a reductionist vision of their existence, limited to the aspect of homo oeconomicus passivus. At the same time, this symbolic violence serves to achieve the main technocratic goal of the depoliticisation of decision-making. Law is perceived through the optic of instrumental rationality, while juridification has nothing to do with justice, but merely serves to insulate technocratic decision-making from the political sphere. This paper enquires whether, in the process of its judicial interpretation, the humanization of technocratic law can lead to its repoliticisation. On the basis of three case studies of three well-known judgments interpreting technocratic law, the article makes the assertion that indeed, humanization can be instrumental to repoliticisation. However, the final conclusion is that politicisation is only the first step, and a further one is to ask specifically about the subject of interests protected by the law.

In 2015, the Commission presented two proposals for directives: on the online sale of goods to consumers, and on the supply of digital content to consumers. The two proposals need to be analysed in the context of the existing Consumer Sales Directive from 1999, which is currently under revision as part of the REFIT exercise. If the two proposals enter into force, consumer sales transactions will be regulated by three instruments: with regard to tangible goods sold face to face – by the Consumer Sales Directive, with regard to tangible goods sold at a distance – the Online Sales Directive, and with regard to the sale of digital content – the Digital Content Directive. Not surprisingly, the three texts have much in common as regards their structure and subject matter. They all deal with such issues as conformity (lack of defects), the consumer's remedies in cases of defects, the time limit for bringing such remedies and the burden of proof. They also have two other systemic issues in common: the choice between minimum and maximum harmonisation, on the one hand, and between mandatory and default rules, on the other. The existing Consumer Rights Directive is a minimum harmonisation instrument, and allows Member States to grant consumers a higher level of protection, especially when it comes to the period of seller's liability or the freedom of choice of remedies to be pursued in the event of defects. Similarly, the absence of any EU legislation specifically addressing contracts regarding the sale or rental of digital content or the provision of digital services means that Member States have been free to protect consumers to the extent they see fit. Since the two proposals are framed as maximum harmonisation instruments, the question of the exact extent of consumer rights and the way they should be exercised is crucial.

Prawo użytkowania wieczystego zostało wprowadzone do polskiego
porządku prawnego w 1961 r., a zatem w okresie tzw. realnego socjalizmu. Do przyczyn wprowadzenia tej instytucji prawnej zaliczyć należy istotne czynniki polityczne i ideologiczne, a w szczególności realizację koncepcji, wedle której państwo socjalistyczne nie powinno zbywać gruntów na rzecz osób fizycznych i prawnych. Poza funkcjami polityczno-ideologicznymi, omawiana instytucja pełniła także określone
funkcje społeczno-gospodarcze, do których należało m.in. udostępnianie
osobom fizycznym oraz spółdzielniom mieszkaniowym gruntów pod
budownictwo mieszkaniowe. Po transformacji ustrojowej w 1989 r. instytucja użytkowania wieczystego nie została wyeliminowana z polskiego porządku prawnego, występuje też w obrocie prawnym. Z perspektywy socjologicznoprawnej wynika to przede wszystkim z dopasowania funkcji społecznych omawianej instytucji do zmienionych warunków po transformacji ustrojowej.

W dniach 1–3 września 2016 r. na University of Kent w Canterbury (Wielka Brytania) odbyła się XXXI Krytyczna Konferencja Prawnicza (Critical Legal Conference). Po ubiegłorocznej – XXX Krytycznej Konferencji Prawniczej, która odbyła się na Wydziale Prawa, Administracji i Ekonomii Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, coroczne spotkanie prawników krytycznych powróciło znów na Wyspy Brytyjskie. Wcześniejsze konferencje odbywały się w różnych ośrodkach naukowych zarówno w Zjednoczonym Królestwie, jak i na kontynencie, a także w RPA oraz Indiach. W ostatnich dwóch dekadach CLC odbywały się w:. Tematem przewodnim tegorocznej CLC były Punkty zwrotne (Turning points), co miało zwrócić uwagę na zachodzące obecnie zwroty w historii, polityce i prawie. Obrady prowadzone były w sesji plenarnej oraz w 20 równoległych grupach roboczych.

Description: During the period of actually existing socialism, Central Europe was simultaneously the eastern periphery of the capitalist world-system and the western periphery of the Soviet bloc. Following the transition, it transformed itself into a unique amalgam of postcolonialism (vis-à-vis the former Soviet power) and neocolonialism (vis-à-vis the West). This double peripherality means Central Europe's geopolitical situation is both problematic and traumatic. It is a space that conveys fantasies of conquest and normalization as well as reluctance and rejection. The present collection of essays brings together both established and emerging legal scholars from Central Europe to explore the sources and potentialities of critical legal scholarship in a central European setting, the heritage of an authoritarian past and its influence over central European law and politics, and the strategies of challenging the present legal status quo. This book will be of interest to comparative lawyers, critical lawyers and critical theorists, sociologists of law, philosophers of law, specialists in transitional justice, and political scientists.

The paper critically reflects on the dominant narrative of discontinuity with the state socialist past within legal culture by focusing on four examples of legal survivals of the period of actually existing socialism in Polish private law. What is characteristic for these four legal institutions is that despite their state socialist origin they are still being resorted to in practice after the transformation of 1989. This patent fact will serve as a basis to destabilize the dominant narrative about discontinuity in Polish legal culture: if legal institutions created under communist rule in Poland are still useful after the transformation, this period cannot be treated as a ‘legal black hole’ or ‘blackout’ of Polish legal history. To the contrary, any historical narrative of Polish legal culture should take the period of actually existing socialism into account, treating it al pari with any other period of reduced national sovereignty in Polish history. Despite the radically different foundations of the socio-economic system (actually existing socialism vs. capitalism), institutions of private law developed during the socialist period have proven to be useful today. This paradoxical feature of legal survivals—their capability of surviving a radical transformation from one system to another—allows to draw more general conclusions on legal survivals and legal culture, claiming that they are a normal, physiological feature of legal culture, rather than its pathology.

The aim of the present paper is to analyse the actual role of ideology in legal interpretation from the perspectives of legal theory, philosophy of law and theoretical sociology of law. Due to the unavoidable indeterminacy of legal language and the impossibility to predict all potential future situations at the stage of creating legal norms by the legislator, legal interpretation always involves a certain degree of discretionality on the side of the interpreter who fills in the gaps left by the legal materials by solutions consistent with that ideology.

Confronting the law as a form of ideology is not an easy task, especially for lawyers very strongly attached to the internal point of view as part of their professional habitus. Despite this difficulty, the present paper aims at contributing to the ideological demistification of law by proposing to apply Slavoj Žižek’s critique of ideology to the legal field. In particular, the paper elaborates a specific methodology of subjecting legal texts to a critique of ideology by way of identifying the symptoms, i.e. points of breakdown of the ideological field which are simultaneously necessary for that field to achieve its closure. The paradox of symptoms is that they are inevitable for the ideological field, yet at the same time they undermine it, opening up a space for its critique. In this context, the aim of this paper is to confront the fundamental fantasies conveyed by legal ideology. The paper approaches ideological fantasies in strict connection with ideological interpellation, i.e. the process in which a human individual is transformed into a subject of ideology. Ideological interpellation of individuals into subjects is one of the chief operations of the law, which, in its current form, is based on the fundamental assumption that human beings are subjects of rights and duties. Directing the critique of ideology at legal texts aims at undermining the efficacy of the ideological grip held by the Symbolic order upon individuals by insisting on the classical Lacanian thesis that ‘the big Other does not exist’. On a practical level, critique of legal ideology performed by lawyers themselves can help to bring about a more reflexive approach to their participation in the principal practices of legal culture and can help to raise lawyers’ awareness regarding their role in society.

The aim of this paper is to analyse recent (2005-2015) examples of explicit references to Roman law in the udgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union and in the opinions of the Advocates General. The paper focuses only on explicit references to Roman law, i.e. those which openly refer to Roman law, either by using the term ‘Roman law’ or by indicating a specific reference to a Roman legal source, e.g. the Corpus Iuris Civilis or the Gai Institutiones. The study found that only 17 examples of such explicit references can be found during the period under scrutiny. A closer analysis of those examples shows that, firstly, an explicit engagement with Roman legal sources is a relatively rare phenomenon in the case-law of the CJEU; secondly, that such examples are mainly found in the opinions of Advocates General; thirdly, that the role played by explicit references to Roman law can be threefold. The qualitative analysis showed that out of the 17 explicit references to Roman law, in six cases Roman law did actually play a certain role in the legal reasoning. In nine further cases in which an explicit reference was made to Roman law, the reference did not serve any clearly identifiable purpose in the process of interpretation, but rather served to indicate the historical background. Finally, in two cases Roman law was mentioned incidentally, without the aim of using it for purposes of interpretation of an EU legal text nor the aim of giving a broader historical perspective.

The paper argues that the multilingualism of the EU legal order should be viewed from the point of view of the right of individuals to acquaint
themselves with the their rights and duties under EU law in the official language of their Member State. In case of discrepancies of equally authentic versions, individuals should have the possibility to rely on an ‘authentic version’ defence, especially in tax, customs and criminal law relationships.

Artykuł stawia sobie za cel zanalizowanie realizacji idei wolności, równości i własności w prawie prywatnym na przykładzie projektowanych przepisów o dostarczaniu treści cyfrowych konsumentom. Rozważania poświęcone każdej z tytułowych idei podzielone są na część ogólną, dotyczącą ich realizacji w prawie prywatnym w ogólności, oraz na część szczegółową, poświęconą ich realizacji w projektowanych przepisach o dostarczaniu treści cyfrowych.

Pewnym instytucjom prawnym dane jest przetrwać pomimo zasadniczej transformacji ustrojowej, takiej jak transformacja od socjalizmu państwowego do kapitalizmu w Europie środkowej w roku 1989. Istniejąca siatka pojęciowa nauk prawnych nie pozwala jednak w zadowalający sposób opisać tego zjawiska. Wynika stąd potrzeba wprowadzenia i dopracowania pojęcia "reliktu prawnego". Pojęcie to odnosi się do instytucji prawnej, którą cechuje ciągłość na płaszczyźnie składających się na nią norm prawnych, pomimo niejednokrotnie występujących zmian gdy idzie o pełnione przez tę instytucję funkcje polityczne, gospodarcze, społeczne bądź też ideologiczne.

Abstrakt: Artykuł niniejszy stawia sobie cztery cele: po pierwsze, dokonanie analizy dogmatycznej całokształtu umocowań prawnych Unii Europejskiej do stanowienia przepisów w zakresie prawa prywatnego materialnego, procesowego i kolizyjnego; po drugie, analizę sposobów korzystania z tych umocowań przez ustawodawcę unijnego oraz ewentualnych wskazówek TSUE w tym zakresie; po trzecie, podjęcie analizy porównawczej poszczególnych kompetencji i odniesienie ich do prawa materialnego, procesowego i kolizyjnego; po czwarte, na podstawie analizy dotychczasowych sposobów korzystania ze wskazanych umocowań oraz analizy porównawczej poszczególnych norm traktatowych – przeprowadzenie krytyki i zaproponowanie konkretnych wniosków w zakresie sposobów korzystania z unijnych kompetencji w poszczególnych obszarach prawa prywatnego.
Abstract: The present paper has four aims. First of all, to subject the legal powers of the European Union to enact private law rules in the fields of substantive private law, procedural private law and private international law to a doctrinal analysis. Secondly, to analyse the methodology of using those legal powers by the Union legislature and possible indications by the Court of Justice with that regard. Thirdly, to subject the individual rules granting powers to the EU to enact rules of substantive private law, procedural private law and private international law to a comparative analysis. Fourthly, on the basis of the analysis of the hitherto methods of using the aforementioned powers, provide for a critical appraisal and put forward suggestions as to the methods of using them.

Celem artykułu jest nim próba udzielenia odpowiedzi na pytanie, w jaki sposób instytucje prawne wywodzące się z radykalnie odmiennego ustroju społeczno-gospodarczego – tzw. „relikty prawne” (legal survivals)
– uległy dostosowaniu do warunków nowego ustroju (lub też dlaczego takiego dostosowania wręcz nie wymagały), a zatem poznanie warunków możliwości przetrwania tego rodzaju instytucji prawnych po transformacji ustrojowej. W nawiązaniu do tak sformułowanego problemu badawczego artykuł stawia tezę, że warunkiem przetrwania określonego reliktu prawnego jest jego funkcjonalność  wobec realiów nowego ustroju. Funkcjonalność tę można osiągnąć na dwa sposoby: po pierwsze, przez całościową lub częściową kontynuację dotychczasowej funkcji danej instytucji prawnej (jeżeli funkcja ta jest in toto albo częściowo użyteczna także w warunkach nowego ustroju); po drugie, poprzez pełnienie nowych funkcji (użytecznych w warunkach nowego ustroju, których rozpatrywana instytucja prawna w warunkach poprzedniego ustroju nie pełniła). Możliwe jest też, oczywiście, łączenie sposobu pierwszego z drugim, a zatem może powstać sytuacja, w której dana instytucja prawna pełni częściowo funkcje dotychczasowe, a częściowo nowe. Tezy artykułu zostaną sformułowane na tle analizy wybranych instytucji prawnych polskiego prawa cywilnego: klauzuli generalnej zasad współżycia społecznego; klauzuli generalnej społeczno-gospodarczego przeznaczenia; prawa użytkowania wieczystego; spółdzielczego własnościowego prawa do lokalu oraz umowy kontraktacji.

Kopš pirmās raksta publicēšanas “Jurista Vārdā” 2015. gada decembrī1 ir notikušas lielas izmaiņas attiecībā uz krīzi Polijas Konstitucionālajā tiesā (KT). Neskatoties uz to, konflikts vēl joprojām ir tālu no atrisinājuma. Šis raksts ilustrē Polijas konstitucionālās krīzes attīstību no 2015. gada 6. decembra.

As part of the implementation of the Digital Single Market Strategy, in December 2015 the European Commission tabled a proposal for a directive on the supply of digital content. The proposed directive contains rules on the contractual aspects of the relationship between suppliers and consumers of digital content. In principle, the directive's rules will be mandatory, in that a contract may not deviate from them to the consumer's detriment. However, many rules are default ones, i.e. may be deviated from by the contract. This is especially so with regard to laying down the criteria for conformity of digital content. Importantly, the proposed directive is to be a 'targeted maximum harmonisation' instrument, meaning that once in force Member States cannot retain or introduce more consumer-friendly rules within its scope.
The scope ratione materiae of the directive includes not only the supply of digital content to consumers in the strict sense, i.e. the supply of software, digital music, e books, films or images, but also digital services, in particular rental of on-line computer programs, cloud computing and social media platforms. The directive extends only to contracts concluded for consideration (counter-performance), which can also take the form of digital data, including personal data, provided by the consumer. Finally, the scope ratione materiae includes all modes of conclusion, i.e. on line and off-line. Importantly, according to the directive's preamble, digital content embedded in tangible goods is to be excluded from its scope. The scope ratione personae comprises exclusively business-to-consumer contracts.
As regards criteria for evaluating whether the digital content is in conformity with the contract, the directive provides that a primary source for such criteria is the terms of the contract, as well as items of pre-contractual information which are deemed to be part of the contract. Subsidiary criteria for evaluating conformity include objective fitness for purpose, international technical standards, as well as public statements.
The proposal takes over from the Consumer Sales Directive the idea of a 'hierarchy of remedies', meaning that in the case of non-conformity, consumers are barred from terminating the contract or claiming a reduction in price, instead having first to ask the trader to bring the digital content into conformity. Hence, consumers do not have a free choice of remedies. However, in the case of non-supply, consumers have the right to terminate immediately. They also have the right to terminate regardless of conformity in cases where the trader modifies the digital content, as well as in long-term contracts. The proposal contains detailed rules on the consequences of termination, particularly regarding the further use of consumers' personal data by traders, and the further use of digital content by consumers.
Experts have identified a number of issues which have not been, but potentially could be, addressed by the directive. These include consumers' rights to multiple downloads, to re-sell digital content and to receive essential updates and maintenance, as well as the issue of optional guarantees granted on top of statutory liability for conformity.
Finally, there are a number of questions about how the proposed directive relates to other legal instruments of EU law, in particular the General Data Protection Regulation, and intellectual property law. With regard to the former, the directive remains 'without prejudice', which means that its legal regime is parallel. With regard to all other legislation, the directive is a lex generalis, meaning that any sectoral or specific legislation will prevail over the directive's rules in case of conflict.

In line with Lenin’s famous quote that Bolsheviks “do not recognise anything private” and that private law must be permeated with public interest, the private (civil) law of the USSR and other countries of the Soviet bloc, including Poland underwent reform aimed at furthering the public interest at the expense of the private one. Specific legal institutions were introduced for this purpose, in the form of legal innovations, loosely, if at all, based on pre-existing Western models. In the Polish case, such legal institutions were usually legal transfers, imported from the Soviet Union. When the socio-economic and political system changed at the turn of 1989 and 1990, the fundamental reforms profoundly impacted upon private law. As a matter of fact, a vast majority of legal innovations of the socialist period aimed at giving preference to the public interest over the private one were either completely repealed or at least underwent deep reform.

The notion of a “legal survival” is a novel research tool, particularly well-suited to analysing legal continuity following a transformation (transition) from one socio-economic system to another. The paper defines a “legal survival” as a certain legal framework, which had originated under an earlier socio-economic formation, has been functional towards it and which has endured despite the subsequent transformation. This novel research tool allows to focus on individual legal phenomena (institutions, general clauses or even legal rules) and the changes they undergo with regard to the social function following a socio-economic and political transformation. The application of the notion of a “legal survival” allows to combine the methodological approaches of legal history, legal theory, doctrinal (positivistic-dogmatic) research into law and the sociology of law.

The aim of the present paper is to assess the impact of EU membership upon private law adjudication in Poland by resorting to the case study of the Unfair Terms Directive (93/13). The paper analyses the case-law of the Polish Supreme Court interpreting the national implementing provisions in order to assert the extent of the impact of the ECJ case-law with that regard. The chapter focuses both on the impact of ECJ’s substantive doctrines on unfair terms upon the Polish Supreme Court, as well as on the impact of the more formal side of ECJ’s case-law, namely its judicial style and methods of argumentation, which display a clear preference for teleological and policy-oriented reasoning over purely textual reasoning.
The chapter resorts both to qualitative and quantitative methods of analysis. First of all, it focuses on reference to the Unfair Terms Directive and ECJ case-law interpreting it in the Supreme Court’s case-law. Secondly, it analyses the frequency and types of policy-oriented arguments in the Supreme Court’s case law on unfair terms, and compares the results with a control sample of SN case law in civil cases. As regards qualitative analysis, the chapter focuses on a number of selected themes discussed in the Supreme Court’s case-law in order to show how its doctrine evolved and whether it was inspired by the Directive and ECJ case law.
The chapter is structured as follows: Section II presents the institutional background focusing on formalism in Polish legal culture, with particular reference to its historical roots and the formalist face of the SN; section III presents the regulatory background, focusing on the Directive and its implementation in Poland; section IV presents the results of a quantitative analysis of SN case law on unfair terms, and section V presents the results of the qualitative analysis. Section VI concludes the chapter.

The notion of legal survivals refers to those elements of the legal superstructure, which, following a profound change in the socio-economic infrastructure, still exist in the new, modified conditions. The proprietary right to an apartment in a cooperative is an example of a survival of the Socialist Legal Tradition in post-1989 capitalist Poland. This right was created in the 1950s in order to serve the specific agenda of that period, namely a compromise between the requirement that preference be given to socialized property (such as cooperative property) and the need of providing persons who finance the construction of their own apartment with a sufficiently attractive legal title. After the transition to capitalism in 1989, the original raison d'être of this right disappeared. In spite of that, proprietary rights to apartments in newly constructed housing stock could still be established until 2007 and in existing housing stock, under certain conditions, until the end of 2012. The paper aims at exploring the reasons of the existence of this legal survival in the modified socio-economic context.

The Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) is well known for its preference for extra-legal legal arguments over intra-legal ones. Indeed, in the CJEU's interpretive practice, as a rule, linguistic arguments give way to systemic and teleological ones, and the Court's prevalent approach favours policy arguments (i.e. extra-legal ones) over linguistic interpretation (i.e. a paradigmatic form of the deployment intra-legal arguments). The object of this study is a single decision of the CJEU, namely its judgment of 14 March 2013 in Case Aziz v Catalunyacaixa (Case C-415/11) in scope of proportion and significance of extra-legal and intra-legal arguments.

Confronting the law as a form of ideology is not an easy task, especially for lawyers very strongly attached to the internal point of view as part of their professional habitus. Despite this difficulty, the present paper aims at contributing to the ideological demistification of law by proposing to apply Slavoj Žižek’s critique of ideology to the legal field. In particular, the paper elaborates a specific methodology of subjecting legal texts to a critique of ideology by way of identifying the symptoms, i.e. points of breakdown of the ideological field which are simultaneously necessary for that field to achieve its closure. The paradox of symptoms is that they are inevitable for the ideological field, yet at the same time they undermine it, opening up a space for its critique. In this context, the aim of this paper is to confront the fundamental fantasies conveyed by legal ideology. The paper approaches ideological fantasies in strict connection with ideological interpellation, i.e. the process in which a human individual is transformed into a subject of ideology. Ideological interpellation of individuals into subjects is one of the chief operations of the law, which, in its current form, is based on the fundamental assumption that human beings are subjects of rights and duties. Directing the critique of ideology at legal texts aims at undermining the efficacy of the ideological grip held by the Symbolic order upon individuals by insisting on the classical Lacanian thesis that ‘the big Other does not exist’. On a practical level, critique of legal ideology performed by lawyers themselves can help to bring about a more reflexive approach to their participation in the principal practices of legal culture and can help to raise lawyers’ awareness regarding their role in society.

Celem artykułu jest zbadanie, jakie podejście metodologiczne jest najbardziej adekwatne do analizowania ciągłości wybranych instytucji prawnych ("reliktów prawnych") w okresie po transformacji ustrojowej. Artykuł, nawiązując do pojęcia metody analitycznej w prawoznawstwie, wyróżnia trzy możliwe podejścia do badania reliktów - analityczne wąskie, analityczne rozszerzone, oraz nieanalityczne. Stosując zaproponowane metody badawcze do wybranych reliktów artykuł dowodzi, że optymalną metodą badania ciągłości wybranych instytucji prawnych jest koniunkcja metody analitycznej rozszerzonej oraz metody nieanalitycznej.

The notion of private law, as opposed to public law, has a long tradition and is of great importance in most EU Member States. National private law is seen as the constitution of civil society and enjoys a high degree of democratic legitimacy with regard to social justice. However, that distinction is not so important in EU law, where EU legislative competences in any given field of law are limited to those explicitly provided for in the Treaties. There is thus no general EU competence to regulate private law in its entirety, but a number of specific competences addressing selected aspects. The clash between coherent national systems of private law and the EU's functionalist approach leads inevitably to a fragmentation of EU legislation regarding private law. This poses a challenge to the coherence of national systems of private law, with adverse effects not only on consistency, but also transparency and legal security. Of potential options for restoring coherence to private law, the only feasible one is through spontaneous harmonisation. This can occur as a spill-over of EU law rules and principles, through national legislatures and judiciaries. But above all, it is likely to happen through the framing of national and EU private law within a common grid of concepts, principles and rules.

In its Digital Single Market Strategy, unveiled in May 2015, the Commission has promised to come up with a revised proposal for a Common European Sales Law by the end of the year. More indications have been given the Commission in an Inception Impact Assessment, published in July 2015.
The debate on the revamped proposal will have to address at least five crucial issues. Firstly, the legal form – whether the future online sales law will be a regulation or a directive? Secondly, if the legal form of a directive is chosen, whether total harmonisation or minimum harmonisation would be most appropriate, taking into account the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality? Thirdly, whether it would be sufficient for the instrument to regulate cross-border trade, or should it also extend to purely domestic online transactions? A fourth issue regards the 'country of origin principle' – should traders be allowed to rely on their domestic law when selling to consumers abroad? How would that fit with the current system of Rome I and Brussels Ia regulations? Finally, the debate must focus on the content of the revamped proposal. Should it be copy-pasted from the original CESL, or perhaps tailor-made to online transactions specifically, where both consumers and traders have different interests and expectations than in offline transactions?

In der digitalen Binnenmarktstrategie, die im Mai 2015 vorgestellt wurde, verspricht die Kommission, einen überarbeiteten Vorschlag für ein Gemeinsames Europäisches Kaufrecht bis Ende des Jahres vorzulegen. In einer Folgenabschätzung in der Anfangsphase, veröffentlicht im Juli 2015, wurden der Kommission zusätzliche Hinweise gegeben. Die Debatte über den überarbeiteten Vorschlag wird sich mindestens mit fünf Schwerpunktbereichen auseinandersetzen müssen. Erstens die Frage der Rechtsform – wird das zukünftige Gesetz für Online-Käufe die Form einer Verordnung oder einer Richtlinie annehmen? Zweitens stellt sich die Frage, sollte die Rechtsform einer Richtlinie gewählt werden, ob eine Vollharmonisierung oder eine Mindestharmonisierung angemessener wäre, unter Berücksichtigung der Grundsätze der Subsidiarität und Verhältnismäßigkeit. Drittens stellt sich die Frage, ob der Anwendungsbereich des Instruments auf grenzübergreifenden Handel beschränkt, oder ob dieser auch auf rein inländische Online-Transaktionen ausgeweitet werden sollte. Ein vierter Problembereich betrifft das Herkunftslandprinzip – sollten sich Händler auf inländisches Recht berufen können, wenn sie Waren an Verbraucher im Ausland verkaufen? Welche Auswirkungen hätte dies auf das derzeitige System der Rom I- und Brüssel Ia-Verordnungen? Schließlich muss eine Debatte über den Inhalt des überarbeiteten Vorschlags geführt werden. Die Frage ist, ob dieser aus dem ursprünglichen GEKR übernommen werden oder vielleicht speziell auf Online-Transaktionen zugeschnitten werden sollte, da bei solchen Transaktionen sowohl Verbraucher als auch Händler andere Interessen und Erwartungen als bei Offline-Transaktionen haben.

Dans sa stratégie pour un marché unique numérique, dévoilée en mai 2015, la Commission s'est engagée à présenter une révision de la proposition relative à un droit commun européen de la vente avant la fin de l'année. La Commission a donné plus de précisions à ce sujet dans une analyse d'impact initiale publiée en juillet 2015. Le débat sur la proposition remaniée devra à tout le moins régler cinq questions cruciales. Premièrement, la forme juridique: le futur acte relatif à la vente en ligne sera-t-il un règlement ou une directive? Deuxièmement, si la forme juridique retenue est celle d'une directive, faut-il privilégier une harmonisation totale ou une harmonisation minimale, compte tenu des principes de subsidiarité et de proportionnalité? Troisièmement, est-il suffisant que l'instrument régisse le commerce transfrontalier, ou doit-il également couvrir les transactions en ligne exclusivement nationales? Une quatrième question a trait au "principe du pays d'origine": le commerçant doit-il pouvoir se prévaloir de sa législation nationale lorsqu'il vend son produit à un consommateur vivant à l'étranger? Comment intégrer ce principe dans le système actuel des règlements Rome I et Bruxelles I bis a? Enfin, le débat doit se concentrer sur le contenu de la proposition remaniée. Faut-il simplement copier-coller le DCEV initial, ou l'adapter aux transactions en ligne spécifiquement, dans lesquelles tant les consommateurs que les professionnels affichent des intérêts et des attentes autres que dans les transactions hors ligne?

The free movement of judgments in the European Area of Justice presupposes a high level of mutual trust between the judiciaries of the Member States. From the citizens' perspective, the key issue is the balancing of the fundamental rights of claimants and defendants, i.e. the right of access to justice (to pursue a claim) and the rights of the defence. Mutual trust in judiciaries can be built in various ways. First of all, through the creation of uniform European procedures in the form of optional instruments, which lead to the pronouncement of judgments on the basis of common rules of procedure. Secondly, sectorspecific harmonisation of procedural law is possible, addressing civil procedure in the context of other policy areas, such as intellectual property, competition law or consumer protection. Thirdly, horizontal harmonisation of civil procedure by way of directives is also possible. Up to now, only selected and rather narrow of areas of civil procedure have been addressed in this manner.However, a more ambitious project has been launched by the European Law Institute (ELI) in collaboration with the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (Unidroit), aimed at elaborating European rules of civil procedure. These rules, once finalised, could be the basis of a future directive on minimum standards of civil procedure in the EU.

La libre circulation des décisions dans l'espace européen de la justice suppose un degré élevé de confiance réciproque entre les autorités judiciaires des États membres. Du point de vue des citoyens, le plus important est de trouver un équilibre entre les droits fondamentaux des requérants et ceux des défendeurs, c'est-à-dire entre le droit d'accès à la justice (droit d'intenter une action) et les droits de la défense. Il y a diverses façons de construire cette confiance réciproque entre les autorités judiciaires. Tout d'abord, par la création de procédures civiles européennes uniformes sous la forme d'instruments facultatifs permettant de prononcer des décisions sur la base de règles de procédure communes. Deuxièmement, il est possible d'harmoniser le droit procédural selon une approche sectorielle en abordant la procédure civile dans le contexte d'autres domaines de politique tels que la propriété intellectuelle, le droit de la concurrence ou la protection des consommateurs. Troisièmement, il est également possible d'harmoniser la procédure civile par la voie de directives. Jusqu'à présent, seuls quelques domaines étroits de la procédure civile ont été abordés de cette manière. Un projet plus ambitieux a toutefois été lancé par l'Institut de droit européen (ELI) en collaboration avec l'Institut international pour l'unification du droit privé (Unidroit), qui vise à élaborer des règles européennes de procédure civile. Une fois finalisées, ces règles pourraient constituer le fondement d'une future directive sur les règles minimales de procédure civile dans l'Union.

Tieši pirms parlamenta vēlēšanām 2015. gada oktobrī izejošais parlaments nolēma aizpildīt piecu konstitucionālo tiesnešu vietas, kurām būtu jākļūst vakantām tikai pēc vēlēšanām. Jaunais parlaments pasludināja šos nozīmējumus par juridiski  esaistošiem un 2. decembrī veica piecu jaunu tiesnešu apstiprinājumu, lai aizpildītu tās pašas vakances. 3. decembrī Konstitucionālā tiesa secināja, ka pārejas noteikums, kas ļāva iepriekšējam parlamentam ievēlēt divus tiesnešus, kuru termiņš
beidzas tagadējā parlamenta darbības laikā, ir antikonstitucionāls.

Since 1986, Poland has had its Constitutional Court (TK), placed outside the structure of ordinary judiciary. Since 1993, the TK has been issuing ‘interpretive judgments’ in which it decides that a certain statutory rule is constitutional only under a certain interpretation. On numerous occasions the Supreme Court (SN) has refused to follow the TK’s decisions, claiming that they are unconstitutional, ultra vires and non-binding. An analysis of the arguments put forward by the SN and TK in this ‘war of the courts’ reveals that the SN prefers ultra-formalist arguments typical of the hyperpositivist legal culture of the former state-socialist period, whilst the TK seems to prefer pragmatist arguments, more typical to contemporary Western legal culture. The paper concludes that behind the ‘war of the courts’ in Poland there is a clash of legal cultures and attempts at identifying the reasons for it.

Прекращение существования социалистической правовой семьи не следует отождествлять с исчезновением лежащей в ее основе социалистической правовой традиции. Влияние существовавшего на протяжении 45 лет реального социализма на польскую правовую культуру до сих пор существенно. Во-первых, имеет место непрерывность существования правовых учреждений (судов, юридического сообщества), а система юридического образования и система назначения на должности судей способствуют оспроизводству правовой культуры. Во-вторых, ультраформализм («гиперпозитивизм»), ассоциирующийся с социалистической правовой традицией в ее остсталинистском изводе, остается доминирующим среди польских практиков типом правопонимания. В-третьих, до сих пор имеется масса примеров нормативной преемственности, особеннов процессуальном и материальном частном праве. На основании этих факторов можно исследовать, являются ли различия «правового стиля» новых – центральноевропейских – и старых – западноевропейских – членов ЕС достаточно важными для того, чтобы признать существование центральноевропейской правовой семьи – пятой правовой семьи Европейского Союза (наряду с семьей
общего права, романской, германской и скандинавской равовыми семьями).

Celem niniejszego szkicu metodologicznego jest udzielenie odpowiedzi na pytanie, czy koncepcja interpelacji ideologicznej zaproponowana przez L. Althussera, w formie nadanej jej przez S. Žižka, może zostać zoperacjonalizowana w sposób umożliwiający jej wykorzystanie do krytycznej lektury tekstów prawnych. Na tak postawione pytanie szkic udziela odpowiedzi pozytywnej, podnosząc, że zastosowanie wskazanej metody może przyczynić się do otwarcia dyskursu prawnego na działanie teorii krytycznej. Szkic składa się z trzech części. W pierwszej z nich zostaje przedstawiona teoria ideologii w ujęciu Žižka; w drugiej – koncepcja interpelacji ideologicznej, a w trzeciej zostaje podjęta, w sposób przyczynkarski, próba operacjonalizacji wskazanej koncepcji.
English abstract: The present methodological paper aims at answering the question whether the notion of ideological interpellation, put forward by L. Althusser, in the form given to it by S. Žižek, can be operationalised in order to be deployed as a tool for the critical reading of legal texts. The paper gives a positive answer to the question, indicating that the application of the said method may contribute to the opening of legal discourse towards the impact of critical theory. The paper consists of three parts. The first part presents Žižek’s theory of ideology, the second part discusses the notion of ideological interpellation, and the third part is devoted to a preliminary attempt at operationalising the said notion.

The number of small cross-border transactions, usually in business-to-consumer contacts, is steadily growing in the EU. If a transaction ends up in a way which does not satisfy the parties, they may want to go to court to get their money back or make sure a faulty good is repaired. However, national civil procedures are not well adapted for such cross-border litigation over small claims. That is why the EU legislature introduced a European Small Claims Procedure (ESCP) back in 2007. For various reasons, this initiative has not been a success and is being used only sparingly. The in-depth analysis aims at answering the question whether the Commission proposal to amend the ESCP, now before the Legal Affairs Committee of the Parliament, can help to remove the existing shortcomings and turn this procedure into a powerful tool in the hands of European consumers.

The dissolution of the Socialist Legal Family should not be identified with the disappearance of the underlying Socialist Legal Tradition. The impact of the 45 years of Actually Existing Socialism upon Polish legal culture is still significant. First of all, there has been an almost uninterrupted continuity of legal instiutions (courts, legal professions), and the system of legal education and judicial appointments furthers the continuity of legal culture. Secondly, ultra-formalism (‘hyperpositivism’) associated with the Socialist Legal Tradition in its post-Stalinist version remains the dominant working legal thought in Poland. Thirdly, there are still many examples of normative continuity, especially in procedural and substantive private law. On the basis of these factors, it is possible to enquire whether the differences of legal style between the new Central European member states of the EU and its old Western European member states are sufficiently significant as to justify the identification of a Central European legal family as the fifth legal family in the European Union (apart from the Common Law, Romanic, Germanic and Scandinavian Legal Families).

After 1989, the Polish legal elites embraced a transformation  discourse, presenting  modern Polish legal history as a circular journey  from  Europe  to  the  dystopia  of  “Communism”  and  back.  As  a  con­sequence, links with the state-­socialist past are repressed from the col­lective  consciousness  of  the  legal  community  and  presented  as  post­-Soviet “weeds” in the Polish gardens of justice. However, the repressed  weeds return in the form of symptoms – legal survivals, which lawyers  tend to ignore or conceal because they subvert the dominant ideological  narrative. In this paper, I focus on metanormative survivals of the So­cialist Legal Tradition in Poland which can all be brought under the  umbrella term of  "hyperpositivism”. This concept denotes an extreme ver­sion of classical legal positivism, mixed with elements of orthodox Marx­ism­-Leninism, in the form created in the Soviet Union in the 1930s and  exported to Central European countries after World War II. Owing to the  persistence  of  legal  survivals  of  Actually  Existing  Socialism  in  Polish  legal  culture,  the  paper  argues  for  their  reappraisal  by  resorting  to  a metaphorical  reconceptualisation  on  the  basis  of  selected  mappings  from the source domain of Lacanian psychoanalysis.

This paper aims to present the interaction between the consumer acquis and post-socialist legal culture in Poland as exemplified by the rules on unfair terms in consumer contracts. It will focus on resistance towards Directive 93/13/EC among Polish legislators, scholars and judges, attempting to link this resistance to the background elements of the socialist legal tradition still present in Polish legal culture. The paper analyses two specific areas of resistance: the general test of unfairness and the abstract review of standard terms.

The paper argues that the general test of unfairness has been implemented in Poland in a way which departs from the directive – 'good faith’ was substituted by ‘good customs’ and ‘significant imbalance’ was substituted by a ‘gross violation of interests’ of the consumer. It is submitted that the implementing provisions are actually more lenient towards the trader than the directive requires. The interpretation of the implementing provisions within scholarship and case law is very often detached from the text of the directive and leads to conclusions hard to reconcile with the intent of the Community legislator. Judges and scholars tend to assimilate the ‘good customs’ clause with the socialist general clause of ‘principles of social coexistence’, still present within the Polish Civil Code, rather than exploring the meaning of ‘good faith’ in the directive.

Secondly, the paper argues that the rules on abstract review were implemented by the legislator in a piecemeal manner without providing specific guidance to the courts on how to perform this novel type of review. Many scholars, paying insufficient attention to the directive, have pronounced themselves against any form of abstract review and its third-party effects. There is also evidence within the case law showing that judges have virtually abstained from performing abstract review, resorting to concrete review instead and refusing to recognise the third-party effects of judgments condemning a given term as unfair. This anti European entrenchment has however been reversed by a landmark decision of the Supreme Court.

In this chapter I focus on the institutional implications of the EU Unfair Terms Directive (93/13) in Poland in the broader context of the welfare state model prevalent in that post-socialist EU Member State. I depart from the assumption that there is, in principle, a link between the intensity of the welfare state and the level of consumer protection, as evidenced e.g. by the traditionally high level of both in the Nordic countries. Such a view is supported by the fact that both policies are the expression of the desire to promote social justice. Hence, I argue that there is a close link between the currently experienced atrophy of the welfare state in capitalist Poland and stances towards consumer protection. Therefore, in section 2, I depart from a brief account of the evolution of the Polish welfare state from the pre-1989 state-socialist model to the current model within the framework of Poland's new capitalism, which can be described on a theoretical plane as marginal or residual, if not simply atrophic. In section 3, I discuss the evolution of consumer protection in Poland, indicating its initial lack during the state-socialist period and its emergence in the early 1980s, before moving on to the post-socialist period and the impact of European integration. Having presented the background information on the welfare state and consumer protection, in section 4 I discuss in detail the institutional impact of the Unfair Terms Directive. My analysis encompasses such aspects as the definition of a consumer, the substantive scope of protection and the available means of protection (incidental and abstract control). I will also discuss the newly introduced group actions (comparable to class actions) which are specifically tailored for consumer cases, including those where the rules on unfair terms are involved. In section 5, I present my concluding remarks.

Quality of legislation is understood as its fitness for a given purpose. In general, legislative acts as texts of legal culture can be said to fulfil two main functions: regulatory (instrumental) and ideological (symbolic). Quality of legislation becomes a particular challenge during a period of radical socio-economic transition, e.g. the transition from state socialism (Really Existing Socialism) to capitalism which occured in Central Europe at the turn of the 1980s and 1990s.

The case study analysed in this paper focuses on general clauses (general standards) in Polish private law, such as "principles of social intercourse", "good morals" and "equity". After the transition from state socialism to capitalism in 1989, the legislature chose not to abrogate but to amend the Civil Code of 1964. As a result, the chief general clause of the socialist period, the "principles of social intercourse" (a concept created by V.I. Lenin) was not only upheld as the Civil Code's main general clause but was even used in new legal rules. However, after 1999 new general clauses began to be added in newly amended or created provisions, including "good morals", "equity" and "reasonableness". Nevertheless, the "principles of social intercourse" have not been repealed.

This has led to the emergence of an incoherent, patchwork system of general clauses which is perplexing academic lawyers and judges. This pluralism of general clauses, in contrast to the pluralism found e.g. in German law, does not allow the judiciary to develop a nuanced approach to general clauses, in which one general clause corresponds to one standard or judicial approach. To the contrary, judges have been forced to treat all general clauses as more or less interchangeable, becoming actually indifferent towards the linguistic form of general clauses.

As regards the regulatory function of general clauses, the paper expresses the fear that after the adoption of a new Polish Civil Code (which is currently being drafted) or, possibly, a European Civil Code (based on the Draft Common Frame of Reference), Polish judges and scholars could actually stand out from their colleagues from other member state of the EU due to their indifference to the linguistic form of geneal clauses. An analysis of the draft Polish Civil Code and the DCFR both reveal that their authors have deliberately used numerous different general clauses which correspond to different standards and different methodologies which are to be employed in their application. However, Polish judges - used to the interchangeability of general clauses and immune to their linguistic form - might actually overlook the legislative's intent of creating a more nuanced system of general clauses which could lead to an oversimplifying interpretation of the future Civil Code.

As regards the ideological function of general clauses, the paper draws attention to the metaphorical nature of general clause and points out that different linguistic forms of general clauses correspond to different visions of the socio-economic order. Therefore a patchwork system comprising both general clauses of state-socialist origin and those of capitalist origin leads to a blurred ideological message

This paper analyses the relationship between the principle of solidarity (principle of loyal cooperation, principle of good faith) enshrined in Article 10 EC and the liability of the Community for damages enshrined in Article 288(2) EC. Departing from the assumption that both the the duty of loyal cooperation and Community liability for damages are general principles of Community law, the paper argues that the question of the locus standi of Member States to bring an action against the Community on the basis of Article 288(2) EC must be resolved on the basis of weighing principles, rather than by resorting to a linguistic, teleological or systematic interpretation of Article 288(2) EC. The essential legal question boils down to the issue whether bringing an action for damages against the Community would amount to a disloyal conduct on part of the Member State concerned. The paper suggests a negative answer and thus argues for granting locus standi to Member States under Article 288(2) EC. Such a view is corroporated by the fact that Member States may bring other types of actions against the Community, as for instance the action for anullment or the action for failure to act. Community liability vis-à-vis the Member States would be a corollary of Member States liability for failure to fulfil Community obligations under Articles 226 and 228 EC. However, Member States ought to be particularly prudent when bringing actions for damages against the Community. In particular, bringing an action which would be manifestly unfounded would amount to a breach of the duty enshrined in Article 10 EC.

"The paper analyses the relationship between the possible future unification of private law in the European Union and Polish culture of private law understood as the ability of Polish legal culture to adapt to a new unified European private law in the future. Based on the assumption that Polish culture of private law does not have a ‘unique’ or ‘original’ character making it qualitatively distinct from e.g. German or French legal culture, the paper argues that Polish legal culture as such does not pose any obstacles to the unification of private law. The paper also analyses the possible impact of the unification of Polish private law on the practices of Polish legal culture, i.e. legislation, adjudication, legal counselling, scholarship and education. It argues that the unification would be the most beneficial for Polish practitioners and scholars, making their professions much more internationalised than at present and enhancing the possibility of their effective free movement across the Union. The same applies to legal education: the new unified European private law introduced into curricula of law schools, law faculties and legal professional training would mean that Polish students and apprentices would study subjects of a pan-European, and not only national relevance. A benefit common to judges, practitioners and scholars would be the possibility of resorting to a much wider scope of case-law and scholarly writings in pleadings, court decisions and academic discussions de lege lata. However, it would also be important to
ensure that an input from Polish scholars is made into the new European doctrine of private
law, so that the movement of legal ideas is not only one-sided"

The paper analyses the survivals of the Socialist Legal Tradition within Polish law of civil procedure. The examples of such survivals studied in this paper include the prosecutor's participation in civil proceedings and public-interest oriented forms of appeal in civil proceedings (previously called "extraordinary revision", now "skarga kasacyjna") which can be launched by certain public officials, quite apart from the will of the parties to the litigation.

"ABSTRACT. The present paper is an analysis of the Principles of European Law on Commercial Agency, Franchise and Distribution" prepared by the.Study Group on a European Civil Code. The paper presents the Study Group (point II), the methodology of the drafting process (point III), the potential role of the draft in a future European Civil Code (point IV) and contains a detailed analysis of the black-letter rules (point V). The conclusions (point VI) contain remarks regarding the potential usefulness of the Principles for the Polish legislature.

STRESZCZENIE. Dokument zatytułowany "Zasady prawa europejskiego o umowie agencyjnej, umowie franczyzy oraz umowie dystrybucyjnej", przygotowany został przez Podzespół ds. Umów o Charakterze Długoterminowym działający w ramach Grupy Badawczej ds. Europejskiego Kodeksu Cywilnego, kierowanej przez niemieckiego cywilistę Christiana von Bara. Prace nad projektem trwały od 1998 r. do czerwca 2003 r. Zespołowi przewodniczył wybitny cywilista i teoretyk prawa, prof. Martijn Hesselink z Uniwersytetu Amsterdamskiego, a w skład zespołu wchodzili cywiliści z różnych państw Unii (Hiszpania, Włochy, Niderlandy). Celem niniejszego artykułu jest krótka prezentacja Grupa Badawczej ds. Europejskiego Kodeksu Cywilnego, w ramach której powstał komentowany projekt (punkt II), przedstawienie metodyki pracy przyjętej przez grupę amsterdamską (punkt III) ukazanie roli, jaką w intencji twórców projektu miałby on odegrać jako część ewentualnego europejskiego kodeksu cywilnego (punkt IV), wreszcie szczegółowa analiza postanowień projektu (punkt V). Całość zamykają uwagi dotyczące potencjalnej przydatności projektu jako źródła inspiracji dla ustawodawcy polskiego (punkt VI)."

*** 165 Żyjący w II w. po Chrystusie rzymski prawnik Domitius Ulpianus, odnosząc się do zmian w prawie, napisał następujące słowa:„In rebus novis constituendis evidens esse utilitas debet ut recedatur ab eo iure, quod diu aequum visum est” 1.

On the basis of an analysis of selected pieces of legal discourse produced by the principal practices of Polish legal culture, the paper concludes that the said culture can be characterised as being highly positivist and dogmatic (formalist). This includes such features as a very narrow understanding of the notion of ‘sources of law’ (which are limited to written law but exclude e.g. precedent), textualism as the main approach to legal interpretation, as well as a high degree of abstraction of legal thought. These characteristics of Polish legal culture are explained by historical factors, especially the influence of 19th century Western European legal formalism, subsequently strengthened and preserved during the period of Actually Existing Socialism. In contrast, the style of the European Court of Justice is described as more pragmatic, and in particular open to the idea of precedent. It is argued that the exposure of Polish judiciary to European law will help to move the judicial discourse from formalism and dogmatism towards transparency and realism. The paper also notes the frequent use of Latin maxims in Polish case-law and treats it as a characteristic feature of Polish legal culture.

Mocną stroną recenzowanej pracy jest twórcza analiza orzecznictwa ETS w sprawach dotyczących swobodnego przepływu towarów, dokonana przez Autora pod kątem
stosowania przez Trybunał zasady pomocniczości. Autor wykazuje się dobrą znajomością prawa wspólnotowego, w szczególności prawa wspólnego rynku. Zgłoszone przez Autora wnioski de lege ferenda idą niewątpliwie w dobrym kierunku. Należy wyrazić jednak ubolewanie, że Autor nie odważył się wyjść poza czysto pozytywistyczne rozumienie zasady pomocniczości, wykluczając tym samym bardziej nowatorskie
spojrzenie na problem kompetencji Wspólnoty Europejskiej w dziedzinie rynku wewnętrznego.

The Republic of South Africa and six neighbouring countries, traditionally eferred to as "Roman-Dutch jurisdictions", form one of the last enclaves in the world where Roman law is officially recognised as a source of law. The aim of the paper is to provide a qualitative analysis of citations of Roman law in contemporary case-law from the region.
The research revelals that the way in which a South African judge deals with a fragment from the Corpus Iuris Civilis is not very different from the way a civil code is applied in a European country. A characteristic feature of the judicial application of Roman law in South Africa is the role of precedent, although a functional interpretation of Roman sources is given precedence over earlier case-law. Considerable importance is given to opinions of contemporat South African legal scholars.

The EU Institutions and the Idea of a Europan Code of Private Law

The studies on a European Code of Private Law were originally inspired by officials of the European Commission in the 1970s. The Commission financed such works for several years during the 1980s and early 1990s without, however, endorsing the codifications project in any official document. It was the European Parliament which advocated codification in two resolutions of 1989 and 1994. It was only after the Tampere Summit in 1999 and a further Parliament resolution of 2001 that the Commission drew up its Communication on European Contract Law (2001) and successively the Action Plan (2003)
.
It is characteristic that while the position of the Parliament was always enthusiastic towards the idea of a code, the EU Council remained somewhat sceptical and the Commission applied the ‘salami method’, first supporting financially and only later discussing the idea of a European Civil Code in official documents, avoiding however, the word ‘code’.

The latest developments show that the EU institutions are ready more than ever to support the idea of a European Code. However, this would lead to an unacceptable enlargement of EU competencies at the loss of the Member States, in violation of the principle of subsidiarity.

Prace nad europejskim kodeksem cywilnym różnią się zasadniczo od dotychczasowych doświadczeń kodyfikacyjnych. Pomimo oficjalnego poparcia, udzielanego pracom nad kodeksem przez instytucje Unii Europejskiej, nie zdecydowano
się na odgórne powołanie komisji kodyfikacyjnej. Zamiast tego, prace kodyfikacyjne są prowadzone przez niezależne grupy i komisje przygotowujące własne projekty i kontrprojekty, niekiedy otrzymujące jednak wsparcie finansowe od instytucji
unijnych lub krajowych. Celem niniejszego artykułu jest przegląd dotychczas działających grup kodyfikacyjnych oraz próba oceny perspektyw stworzenia europejskiego kodeksu cywilnego
na podstawie prowadzonych przez nie prac. Poszczególne grupy zostaną przedstawione w porządku chronologicznym, według daty powstania danej grupy. Artykuł opisuje stan prac kodyfikacyjnych na koniec 2004 r.

Roman law is usually regarded as an object of historic study and not as a practical discipline. However, the situation is different in six South African states - the Republic of South Africa, Zimbabwe, Lesotho, Swaziland, Botswana and Namibia - which have preserved the uncodified ius commune europaeum brought by the Dutch to the Cape of Good Hope in the 17th century. The hierarchy of the fontes iuris oriundi in the South African legal system is the following: the Constitution, statutes, customary law, case-law, Roman-Dutch law and Roman law. The position occupied by Roman law is in fact only subsidiary, however it is a source of law and is referred to from time to time in the case-law. On the other hand it permeates the whole legal system which is based on fundamental notions derived from Roman law, which have been preserved and developed in the treatises of the Roman-Dutch jurists and the case-law of the courts. The frequency of citations of Roman law in the South African case-law has been an object of two major studies. One, conducted by Van Der Merve concerned the period 1970-1979, the other, by Du Plessis - took into account the cases of 1990-1991. The studies revealed that Roman sources are cited in 4, 7-4,8% of the case-law. According to another study by Zimmermann, only in half of those cases the Roman sources were relevant for deciding the case. Neverheless, it is submitted that these figures should be treated as significant, especially when compared with the position occupied by Roman sources in the modern case law in other civilian jurisdictions.

The aim of the paper is to enquire whether a European Civil Code would be an optimal means of achieving legal unity within the sphere of private law in Europe. An analysis of arguments for an against a European Civil Code, raised within the ongoing debate, leads to the conclusion that a codification would not be the optimal solution at this stage. Instead, alternative methods of fostering legal unity should be favoured, such as the creation of a truly European private law scholarship which would allow to re-create a common conceptual framework and legal grammar.

The aim of this article is to present the rules of public international law relating to shifts in international boundary rivers, showing their historical origin and the legal basis of their binding character in the international legal order.

Celem niniejszej pracy jest prześledzenie recepcji rzymskich reguł alluvio i mutatio alvei przez współczesne prawo międzynarodowe publiczne i wykazanie, iż reguły te stanowią część międzynarodowego porządku prawnego – jako ogólne
zasady prawa. Zastosowanie rzymskich reguł alluvio i mutatio alvei w prawie międzynarodowym dowodzi, iż owoc doświadczeń prawnych antycznych Rzymian ciągle pozostaje skarbcem, z którego współcześni prawnicy mogą czerpać w poszukiwaniu
rozwiązań prawnych. Może wydać się zaskakującym fakt, iż  dorobek prawny Rzymian jest nie tylko wartościowy dla prawa prywatnego sensu stricto, ale także dla prawo międzynarodowego publicznego.

In December 2015, the Commission proposed a directive on contracts for online and other distance sales of goods (online sale of goods directive). This would partly replace the existing Consumer Sales Directive with regard to distance sales (both online and offline). Unlike the Consumer Sales Directive, the proposed online sale of goods directive would provide for maximum (total) harmonisation, thereby prohibiting Member States from introducing a higher level of consumer protection within the scope of the directive. The proposed online sale of goods directive is part of the Digital Single Market Strategy, and comes alongside several other proposed legal instruments,  notably the digital content supply directive [2015/0287(COD)] and the portability of digital content directive. Although, legally speaking, the proposal is new, in political terms it aims to replace the 2011 proposal for a Common European Sales Law, in line with the commitment made by the Juncker Commission in December 2015.

On 23 June 2015, the European Parliament and the Council agreed on a compromise regarding the reform of the European Small Claims Procedure (ESCP). The compromise, which still requires to be formally adopted by the two co-legislators in the coming months, provides that the ceiling for claims will be raised from the current €2 000 to €5 000. In five years' time the Commission will be asked to look into the possibility of raising the ceiling even further. The court fees charged to claimants will have to be proportional to the value of the claim, but there will be no fixed cap on fees. Member States will have to accept electronic payments of court fees. The Commission's proposal to expand the scope of the ESCP to domestic cases with some
cross-border implications was not taken on board. Although for the time being employment cases will not be subject to the ESCP, the Commission will be asked to look into the matter again in five years' time. The use of remote communications
technology, like videoconferencing, will be increased and encouraged, although the Member States will not be under a legal duty to install such equipment.

The EU Directive applicable to life insurance sets out what kind of information insurance companies must give to policyholders. It also allows Member States to impose broader information duties, provided that the information is necessary for the policyholder to understand the contract. In its ruling of 29 April 2015, the EU Court of Justice allowed Member States to use open-ended standards to impose information duties, provided that sufficient legal certainty is guaranteed.

European consumers are protected against unfair terms in consumer contracts, including insurance contracts. However, this protection does not extend to terms setting out the essential elements of a contract, such as the extent of the risk covered and the amount of the insurance premium. Nevertheless, if the term under scrutiny is not drafted in 'plain, intelligible language', a court may proceed to evaluate its fairness. The Court of Justice of the EU clarified the concept of 'plain, intel-ligible language' in a recent decision, stating that a term in a contract can be qualified as such only if it allows an average consumer actually to understand the economic consequences of the term.

In February 2014, the Parliament adopted a legislative resolution on the Commission's 2012 proposal to reform the Insolvency Regulation. The Council adopted its first-reading position in March 2015, following trilogue negotiations. The Legal Affairs Committee now proposes the Parliament approves the agreed text in second reading.

The European Small Claims Procedure (ESCP) became operational on 1 January 2009, as a special, EU-wide procedure available both to consumers and traders for pursuing cross-border claims within the Internal Market of a value not exceeding €2 000. During the first five years of its existence, however, the ESCP has been used only rarely. In 2013, the Commission proposed to amend the ESCP Regulation, to raise the ceiling for claims to €10 000, expand the definition of a 'cross-border case', increase the use of electronic communication, introduce a ceiling on court fees (10% of the claim's value) and oblige Member States to accept payment of court fees in electronic form. In April 2015, Parliament's Legal Affairs Committee adopted its report. It proposes to rename the procedure the 'European Simplified Procedure' and raise the ceiling for claims to €5 000 against natural persons, and €10 000 against legal persons. It is against weakening the cross-border requirement, but would allow claims under labour law and privacy law to be included in the regulation. The Committee would also lower the ceiling for court fees from 10% to 5% of the claim's value.

On 4 March 2015 the General Court of the EU, in a case brought by the United Kingdom, ruled that the European Central Bank's 'Eurosystem Oversight Policy Framework' is illegal in so far as it requires that 'central counterparties' have to be located within the euro area. The ECB or any Member State may appeal the judgment on a point of law within two months.

Widespread lobbying in the EU institutions has led to criticism regarding the transparency and accountability of the EU's decision-making process. In response to these concerns, the Parliament set up its transparency register in 1995, followed by the Commission in 2008. The two institutions merged their two instruments in a joint European Transparency Register (TR) in 2011 on the basis of an Inter-Institutional Agreement (IIA). So far, the Council has remained only an observer to the system. The TR is a voluntary system of registration for entities seeking to directly or indirectly influence the EU decision-making process. It has grown at a rate of around 1 000 organisations a year, to reach over 7 000 organisations today. While it is very difficult to make estimates on the actual coverage of the register, a recent academic study (2013) found the register to cover 60-75% of lobbying organisations active at EU level. In line with the IIA, a political review of the system took place in 2013-14. As a result, a new improved registration system will be introduced in January 2015. Parliament has been calling for a mandatory register for lobbyists active within the EU institutions since 2008. It has argued that a mandatory register would ensure full compliance by all lobbyists with the code of conduct. The topic has become increasingly prominent, especially since Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker put the issue on the political agenda, committing to introduce a proposal for a mandatory system by 2016, as requested by Parliament. Furthermore, from 1 December 2014 onwards, the Commission publishes information on meetings of Commissioners, members of their cabinets and Directors-General with lobbyists. The laws in Member States vary with regard to lobbying regulation. Mandatory registration systems exist only in Lithuania, Poland, Slovenia, Austria and the UK. The Irish Parliament is currently working on legislation introducing such a regime. Voluntary registration systems exist in Germany, France and the Netherlands.

The Commissioner-designate for Justice, Consumers and Gender Equality is Vĕra Jourová. Her hearing will take place before the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, the Committee on Legal Affairs, the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality on Wednesday 01 October 2014 (13:30−16:30).

The existing directive on personal data protection was enacted almost two decades ago, at the dawn of the digital era. The Commission proposes to replace that directive with a regulation, thereby not only updating the legal framework, but also ending its fragmentation.

Private law regulates rela­tionships between private individuals, for example between a consumer and a business. The EU may legislate in this area only where specifically authorised by the Treaties, for instance to harmonise national private-law rules posing obstacles to the functioning of the internal market, or to promote judicial cooperation in civil matters. The two types of legal instruments used by the EU legislature in the area of private law are directives and regulations. Some directives are based on minimum harmonisation, meaning that they allow Member States (MS) to retain higher consumer protection standards. Other directives are based on full harmonisation, allowing no deviation from their standard of protection. Regulations, directly applicable in the MS are used mainly in the field of civil procedure, private international law and intellectual property law.

The proposed Common European Sales Law (CESL) is intended to create a uniform set of contract rules available to traders and consumers entering into cross-border transactions in the internal market. The Legal Affairs Committee backs the proposal, but has tabled numerous amendments. However, the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, an associated committee under Rule 50, suggested changing the legal form of CESL to a directive.

For more than 15 years there has been a dual system of trademark law in Europe: an EU-wide Community trademark, and harmonised national trademarks. The Commission proposal aims at more harmonisation and coordination, but does not address trademark-related concerns over free expression. The Parliament's Legal Affairs Committee has put forward numerous amendments, in particular explicitly allowing to use trademarks for purposes of parody, artistic expression, crticism or comment, as well as for offering genuine products, intended as alternatives for well-known brands.

Every year, 1 million small businesses in the EU face problems with collecting cross-border debts, and as much as €600 million in cross-border claims are never satisfied. Domestic orders for payment, which exist in many Member States, are an effective tool for the collection of domestic debts, but often are not practical for cross-border use. Therefore, in order to supplement the existing national measures, the EU legislature has created a European Order for Payment procedure which is available for cross-border claims for money, especially arising from a contract.

The existing directive on personal data protection was enacted almost two decades ago, at the dawn of the digital era. The Commission proposes to replace that directive with a  regulation, thereby not only updating the legal
framework, but also ending its fragmentation.

Although the number of women on company boards is growing, they remain under-represented. Whether greater gender balance is needed and how that could be reached remains controversial. The Commission has proposed to set, at EU level, a minimum quota of women among non-executive board members.

Legislatures in some EU Member States (MS) have introduced special, simplified and accelerated tracks for small claims in legally uncomplicated cases. Those procedures vary both as regards the threshold and level of simplification. The Treaty of Amsterdam gave the EU powers to harmonise civil procedure. As part of that mandate, the EU has adopted a number of coordination instruments (regulating conflicts of jurisdiction and mutual recognition) and created two autonomous EU civil procedures, including the European Small Claims Procedure (ESCP). The ESCP is a simplified and accelerated civil procedure, available only in cross-border cases for claims up to 2 000 EUR. It is an optional procedure and does not replace similar national procedures. Recent reports indicate that in practice the ESCP has not (yet) been a major success with very few cases being brought. The main reasons seem to be a lack of awareness, translation costs and also an uneasy interplay between the ESCP and the remaining rules of national civil procedures. In order to remedy this situation, a number of proposals to amend the ESCP regulation have been made. A European Commission report on its functioning is due in January 2014.

'Standard terms contracts' are an inevitable part of everyday transactions for both businesses and consumers. Parties using such contracts may, however, rely on their advantageous position in order to impose unfair terms on the other contracting party. This has prompted national courts and legislatures to implement measures aimed at combating such terms. In order to bring about harmonisation of such measures in consumer contracts, the EU enacted the Unfair Terms Directive in 1993. The Commission's proposal for a Common European Sales Law (CESL) also addresses the issue of unfair terms, not only in consumer contracts, but also in transactions between businesses.

The tourist sector is an important part of the EU's economy, generating 10% of its GDP. The internet and the rise of low-cost airlines have changed both business approaches and consumer behaviour patterns. Instead of traditional pre-arranged packages, many tourists now either combine the different elements of their holidays themselves or purchase customised packages. The existing Directive on package travel grants consumers numerous rights, in particular with regard to pre-contractual information. However, as it dates back to 1990, it covers only traditional, pre-arranged packages. This legal framework has been further developed by the Court of Justice of the EU which strengthened consumer rights in the event of tour-operator insolvency and loss of enjoyment during holiday. The 1990 Directive provides for minimum harmonisation, allowing Member States to enact more consumer-friendly rules. In July 2013, the Commission presented a proposal for a new Directive on package travel and assisted travel arrangements. It is aimed at adapting the legal framework to the challenges of the digital era. The European Parliament has supported the idea of reforming the law on package travel in two resolutions.

The European Commission published the first edition of the EU Justice Scoreboard in March 2013, a document assessing the quality of the justice systems in the Member States. The Commission’s initiative falls within a broader set of reports and indicators aimed at evaluating justice systems and the rule of law.

The traditional function of a trademark is to guarantee the origin of goods or services to a consumer. However, trademarks have recently started assuming new functions, including for communication and investment. The legal framework for trademarks in the EU is based on the coexistence of national trademarks systems, harmonised by a Directive since 1988, and a unitary Community Trademark, introduced in 1994 by a Regulation. The case-law of the Court of Justice has played a prominent role in the development of EU law on trademarks, in particular with regard to their distinctiveness, use in comparative advertising and in keyword advertising. The existing legal framework has been evaluated in 2011 by the Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property, which prepared an in-depth study for the Commission. Their overall evaluation is positive, and includes several recommendations for improvement. Some academics have, however, expressed more critical opinions. In March 2013 the Commission adopted a reform package for EU trademark law. This concerns both the Community Trademark (to be renamed European Trademark) and the Directive harmonising national trademark laws.

The current legal framework for financial statements was enacted three decades ago and has been heavily amended since. The Commission’s proposal for a new directive aims at consolidating and simplifying the law, reducing the administrative burden for small undertakings, as well as enhancing the transparency of payments made to governments by the extractive industry.

Insolvency law concerns the balancing of several
potentially conflicting interests: those of the
creditors of an insolvent company, its
shareholders and its customers, as well as the
general economic interest in avoiding the
winding down of companies which are still
potentially viable. Currently, insolvency law is not
harmonised at EU level. However, the Insolvency
Regulation lays down the rules on jurisdiction,
recognition and applicable law in the field in
respect of cross-border insolvency. The
Commission has recently proposed its reform."""

""In the EU's recent Succession Regulation,
habitual residence is the key connecting factor
for determining both which courts have
jurisdiction and what law is applicable to a trans-
national succession. Habitual residence is increa-
singly being used as a connecting factor in EU
legislation which includes conflict of laws"rules""

The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive has been in force since 2005, and Member States were obliged to implement it by 2008. In March 2013, the Commission presented its communication on the implementation of the Directive, and in June 2013 the the EP Committee for Internal Market and Consumer Protection held a first exchange of views with a view to drafting an initiative report on that communication.