polish

key issues

state court assistance | case-law

print back

Polish Supreme Court resolution dated 8 September 2011 Case No. III CZP 41/11

1. An interlocutory appeal will lie against an order by the state court, as the court of first instance, denying a motion to challenge an arbitrator.

2. The issue of the independence and impartiality of the arbitrator goes to the essence of the arbitration proceeding as a non-judicial procedure for resolving private legal disputes.

3. Impartiality is a certain intellectual attitude, a psychological state of an objective judge (or arbitrator). In opposition to this, partiality is a characteristic connected with a real or apparent biased attitude of the decision-maker in favour of one of the parties or with respect to the issues in dispute.

4. It is asserted in the literature that “independence” refers only to issues arising out of a relationship between the judge (or arbitrator) and one of the parties. Independence means the lack of any relationship between the arbitrator and the parties to the dispute, in the past or during the course of the proceeding, that could affect the substance of the decision.

5. If the deadline indicated in Civil Procedure Code Art. 1176 passes without effect, the party obtains a right to apply to the state court (within two weeks) to recuse the arbitrator.

6. The proceeding before the state court is conducted on the basis of the Civil Procedure Code. Thus the issue of the permissibility of an interlocutory appeal against the order of the state court denying the motion to recuse the arbitrator should be considered on the basis of application of Civil Procedure Code Art. 394 §1 as relevant.

Data wydania: 08-09-2011 | Case no.: III CZP 41/11

Key issues: state court assistance, arbitrator

id: 20357

Polish Supreme Court order dated 14 July 1998 Case No. III CKN 548/98

1. Submission of a dispute for resolution by an arbitration court does not definitively exclude the jurisdiction of the state court. The proceeding before the arbitration court constitutes only a fragment of the entire system of protection of the interests of the claimant.

2. The position that a proceeding before the state court, initiated by filing of a motion for interim relief to secure a claim which will be pursued before the arbitration court, becomes an independent case within the meaning of Civil Procedure Code Art. 392 §1 is indefensible. Such proceeding remains a proceeding in which only a certain incidental issue is resolved. The ruling that is issued does not end the proceeding “in the case” even though it ends the proceeding initiated by the motion for interim relief. Only the arbitration award will be a ruling ending the case as a certain entirety submitted for judgment. An interim order issued by the state court concerning security for the claim is a ruling that resolves only an incidental issue.

Data wydania: 14-07-1998 | Case no.: III CKN 548/98

Key issues: state court assistance, jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal

id: 20153

Polish Supreme Court order dated 24 February 1998 Case No. I CKN 455/97

By permitting in a separate regulation (Civil Procedure Code Art. 701 §3) an interlocutory appeal against an order concerning, among other things, appointment of an arbitrator, the Parliament clearly let it be known that it does not treat them as ending the proceeding in the matter, as then the general rule set forth at the beginning of Civil Procedure Code Art. 394 §1 would apply.

Data wydania: 24-02-1998 | Case no.: I CKN 455/97

Key issues: state court assistance, arbitrator

id: 20149

Polish Supreme Court order dated 22 January 1997 Case No. I CKN 48/96

1. Because Part 1, Chapter 3 of the Civil Procedure Code, covering the issue of arbitration, does not contain a special regulation on admissibility and deadlines for appellate instruments, the regulations from Chapter 1 will apply as relevant, including among them Civil Procedure Code Art. 392.

2. An order of the province court denying an interlocutory appeal from an order of the district court concerning appointment of an arbitrator and presiding arbitrator may not be regarded as an order ending the proceedings in the case. From the point of view of the proceedings before the state court, the case is ended only by an order ending the proceeding on the petition to set aside the arbitration award (Civil Procedure Code Art. 715), or, as the case may be, an order dismissing the statement of claim because of the existence of an arbitration clause (Civil Procedure Code Art. 199 §1(4)).

Data wydania: 22-01-1997 | Case no.: I CKN 48/96

Key issues: state court assistance, arbitrator

id: 20144

Polish Supreme Court order dated 18 February 1993 Case No. I CRN 6/93

1. The provisions of Civil Procedure Code Part II concerning interim relief to secure a claim are applicable in a case with a “foreign element”. ... The existence of domestic jurisdiction for the proceeding on the merits is not a necessary condition for the proceeding seeking interim relief.

2. Pursuant to Civil Procedure Code Art. 734, when issuing an interim order prior to commencement of the proceeding in the case, the court will set a deadline by which the case shall be commenced or the security will lapse. Following the doctrine, in considering the matter the Supreme Court took the view that filing a claim before a foreign arbitration court before such deadline meets the conditions of this provision.

Data wydania: 18-02-1993 | Case no.: I CRN 6/93

Key issues: state court assistance, arbitration agreement

id: 20138

Polish Supreme Court resolution dated 28 May 1938 Case Nos. C III 2479/36 and C III 1301/36

1. In a proceeding in the common court, governed by the regulations of Part 1, Book 3 of the Civil Procedure Code, if such book does not provide otherwise the provisions of Part 1, Book 2 of the Civil Procedure Code should be applied as relevant.

2. A proceeding commenced upon motion of a party to appoint an arbitrator or a presiding arbitrator is essentially a separate proceeding which is only to prepare the proceeding before the arbitration court. No interlocutory appeal will lie from the appointment of an arbitrator or presiding arbitrator (Civil Procedure Code Art. 485 §2), and thus there may not be a cassation appeal either, as there is no cassation appeal against an order by the court of first instance. However, an interlocutory appeal does lie from the refusal to make an appointment, and a cassation appeal lies from the order of the court of second instance upholding the negative determination of the court of first instance, as from an order ending the proceeding.

3. A proceeding upon a motion by an arbitrator to set his fee is also a separate proceeding, based on the arbitration agreement. Both the arbitrator and the parties litigating before the arbitration court may file interlocutory appeals against the order of the court of first instance and cassation appeals against the order of the court of second instance, as from an order ending the proceeding.

4. A proceeding commenced upon motion of a party seeking a ruling that an arbitration clause has expired is also a separate proceeding before the common court. Here, the state court rules after hearing the dispute between the parties concerning the effectiveness of the agreement. The order resolving this dispute should be considered comparable to a judgment, and thus the parties have a right to file an interlocutory appeal against the order of the court of first instance and a cassation appeal against the order of the court of second instance.

5. Finally, an order on enforceability of an arbitration award or a settlement concluded before the arbitration court also ends a separate proceeding commenced upon motion of a party. ... An interlocutory appeal will thus lie from the order of the court of first instance concerning enforceability, and a cassation appeal will lie from the order of the court of second instance.

6. The court filing fee should be charged on a cassation appeal in the cases referred to above in accordance with general rules.

7. In these instances, the amount in dispute and the amount of the appeal will be the amount in dispute that would be subject to resolution by the arbitration court.

8. In all the foregoing instances, a cassation appeal is obviously permissible only when the amount of the appeal is [at least] PLZ 500 (subject to [Civil Procedure Code] Art. 425 §§ 2 and 3 and Art. XX §1 of the regulations introducing [the Civil Procedure Code]).

Data wydania: 28-05-1938 | Case no.: C III 2479/36 and C III 1301/36

Key issues: state court assistance, arbitrator, arbitration agreement, recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitration award

id: 20075

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 19 November 1937 Case No. C I 2960/36

1. Interference in arbitration by the state courts must be limited to instances strictly provided for by statute. Thus, as Civil Procedure Code Art 485 §1 provides for appointment of the presiding arbitrator by the state court upon application of a party only when the arbitrators have failed to agree on the selection, that court may not intervene in a case where the parties have failed to agreement on the selection of the presiding arbitrator who was to be appointed upon their mutual agreement.

2. [Civil Procedure Code] Art. 491 §1(4), which provides that an arbitration clause shall cease to be in force “if the parties cannot agree on an arbitrator whom under the clause they were to appoint jointly,” does not draw any distinction as to whether the parties failed to agree on selection of an arbitrator for a single-member panel or a three-member panel, or whether the person who was to be selected upon mutual agreement was intended to be a presiding arbitrator; thus what is fundamentally important is that the manner in which the parties agreed that the court would be empanelled proved impossible because of lack of agreement on selection of an arbitrator.

Data wydania: 19-11-1937 | Case no.: C I 2960/36

Key issues: state court assistance, arbitrator

id: 20068

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 18 August 1932 Case No. R 385/32

In light of the legal finality of the resolution ... appointing an arbitrator ..., there is no legal basis for holding the arbitration clause to be ineffective, because the basis that arose through [the arbitrator’s] resignation was cured as a result of appointment of another arbitrator by the state court. The arbitration clause may be deemed ineffective pursuant to [former Austrian] Civil Procedure Code § 583(2)(2) only if an arbitrator refused to perform his duties or is in excessive delay in performing his duties.

Data wydania: 18-08-1932 | Case no.: R 385/32

Key issues: state court assistance, arbitrator, arbitration agreement

id: 20032

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 18 October 1929 Case No. C 1162/28

Decisions issued by the court of first instance on appointment of arbitrators and specification of the terms of the submission, whether granting the application or denying it, are not subject to interlocutory appeal.

Data wydania: 18-10-1929 | Case no.: C 1162/28

Key issues: state court assistance, arbitrator

id: 20020

Warsaw Appellate Court order dated 6 July 1926 Case No. IC N 89/26

This provision [former Civil Procedure Law Art. 13701] that consideration of claims referred to in Civil Procedure Law Art. 1370 shall lie with the court which would have jurisdiction in the event of a judicial dispute should be understood as reiterating the general rule with respect to jurisdiction of the court depending on the amount sought by the plaintiff.

Data wydania: 06-07-1926 | Case no.: IC N 89/26

Key issues: state court assistance, arbitrator

id: 20306

Polish Supreme Court ruling dated 1 June 1926 Case No. R 263/26

1. Only the arbitration court, and not a party, is authorized to submit a demand for legal assistance.

2. With respect to the form of the award and evidentiary measures, the arbitration court is not bound by civil procedure regulations.

Data wydania: 01-06-1926 | Case no.: R 263/26

Key issues: state court assistance, arbitration procedure

id: 20003

scroll up