id: 20579

Polish Supreme Court order

 dated 15 September 2020

Case No. I CSK 182/20

Summary by arbitraz.laszczuk.pl:

A dispute arose between S. G. and W., a joint-stock company, in W. Consequently, the parties decided to have the dispute resolved by an arbitral tribunal in an arbitration award. However, a petition to set aside the arbitration award was filed. The Court of Appeal deliver a judgment of 29 October 2019, but S. G. filed a cassation appeal to the Polish Supreme Court. The Polish Supreme Court, among other things, refused to hear the cassation appeal and ordered S. G. to pay W. the amount of PLN 1,200 as a reimbursement of the cost of the cassation appeal proceedings.

According to Art. 398⁹ § 1 of the Polish Civil Procedure Code (the ‘PCPC’), the Polish Supreme Court allows a cassation appeal, only if there is a significant legal question in the case, there is a need for interpretation of legal provisions which cause serious doubts or discrepancies in case law, proceedings are invalid or the cassation appeal is clearly justified.

The Polish Supreme Court found that in the proceedings there was no significant legal question within the meaning of Art. 398⁹ § 1 point 1 of the PCPC. A significant legal question is not present in the case, if the Polish Supreme Court has expressed a view on a particular issue in its previous rulings and there are no circumstances which justify the change of this view.

It is worth noticing that in this order the Polish Supreme Court made a reference to, among other things, the followings rulings: dated 6 January 1961, Case No. 2 CR 532/59, dated 15 February 1964, Case No. I CR 123/63, dated 3 September 1998, Case No. I CKN 822/97, dated 26 September 2003, Case No. IV CK 17/02, dated 8 December 2006, Case No. V CSK 321/06,  dated 12 September 2007, Case No. I CSK 192/07, dated 9 July 2008, Case No. V CZ 42/08.

Excerpt from the text of the court ruling:

1. Generally, a state court cannot examine whether an award challenged in a petition to set aside was based on properly established facts and how and whether an arbitral tribunal correctly interpreted the norms of substantive law it applied (…).

2. By examination of the grounds and prerequisites set out in Art. 1206 § 1 point 4 of the Polish Civil Procedure Code, what is important is the presence of a failure to meet the requirements in the scope of fundamental principles of arbitration proceedings resulting from a statute or specified by the parties. One of these principles is to base the award on established facts, which takes place after hearing of evidence. (…). Thus, only if the state court found that such hearing of evidence has not been conducted at all, or has been incomplete or obviously faulty, in breach of the principles of logical reasoning, of linking facts together in a cause-and-effect chain, selective admission of evidence in the case, examination of evidence of only one party in groundless omission of the evidence requested by the other party, etc., it would be possible to find that the requirements set out in Art. 1206 § 1 point 4 of the PCPC. (…).

3. [A]n obvious discrepancy between an arbitration award and the facts of the case may demonstrate a violation of the rule of law (…). This means that not every declaration that an award is inconsistent with the factual state may result in setting aside of this award. It is assumed that a conclusion that the rule of law has been violated is justified, if as a result of the arbitration award the fundamental principles of the legal order of the state are infringed (…).