The amendment to the Civil Procedure Code is intended to change the quota threshold for the value of the dispute. This is due to the desire to make the stakes real.
The Act amending the Act – Code of Civil Procedure and some other laws is at the stage of public consultation. one of the changes may reduce the number of proceedings due to 76,000 PLN to 150 raises the value of the subject matter of the dispute from which the proceedings may be taken.
The project justifies, among other things, growth in GDP and average wages. It states that ‘the existing threshold for the value of the subject matter of the dispute deciding the jurisdiction of the district court in question shall apply from 5 February 2005, Therefore above 16 years.
In the meantime Poland joined the European Union, and all economic factors, including GDP and average wages in the national economy, have increased significantly.
Over the last few years, there have also been natural inflation processes which have heavily translated into the price of goods and services, which has made the previously established threshold of property property obsolete.”
Other amendments to the amendment are rather cosmetic and concern complaints, the exclusion of the judge and clarify the rules that allow a secret sitting to be held. It will not be possible to dismiss a judge who is not a member of the ruling, and instruction cannot be a circumstance justifying the appeal of the judge.
As regards the secret sitting, this has been introduced Article 148[1] section 1, according to which ‘the court may recognise the case at a secret sitting when the defendant has accepted the action or when, after the parties have lodged pleadings and documents, including after the complaint or opposition to the order for payment or opposition to an absent judgment, the court considers, having regard to all of the claims and evidence submitted, that a hearing is not necessary’. This is the case where the evidence is already sufficient to resolve the case and the dispute has not been settled.
As far as complaints are concerned, it was clarified which court should recognise them if a specific provision does not decide. It's supposed to be from a court vending machine. second instances.