Compensation for harm is an institution to protect the interests of victims of unlawful acts. It is intended to compensate for a loss whose value cannot be expressed or determined by means of measures appropriate to the calculation of property damage. The compensation structure is based on the law contained in the Civil Code. The interpretation field here is very broad. We are discussing the functioning of redress based on the Supreme Court case law.
It should be noted that the construction of redress in the Polish legal system is based on third basic principles. first the principle boils down to the finding that the court may grant compensation to the injured person only in cases expressly provided for in the law.
This means, in other words, that it is possible to grant compensation exceptionally. The rule is that only property damage is corrected.
The appropriate monetary sum, as compensation for the damage suffered, can only be settled in situations normalised in Article 444(445) and in particular in the event of damage to the body or inducing a health disorder.
second the principle is to limit the use of monetary compensation – as a form of compensation for damage – to the pecuniary liability.
third the principle boils down to the optionality of a cash settlement, which means that its award is not, even in the event of an injury, compulsory and depends on the recognition and assessment of the court as regards the specific circumstances of the case (so in the judgment of 27 August 1969, I PR 224/60, OSNC 1970/6/111).
Determination of compensation
The rules of the code were made by judicatura. They do not contain any criteria to be taken into account when determining the amount of compensation. According to the Supreme Court’s position, compensation with Article 445 kc is primarily compensatory and thus must present some economically noticeable value.
However, this amount cannot be excessive in relation to the damage suffered and the current property relations of society, and should therefore be maintained within reasonable limits (judgment of 22 March 1978 4th CR 79/78, Lex No 8087).
The Supreme Court has also repeatedly spoken about how to determine the level of redress.
In the judgment of 30 November 1999, And CKN 1145/99, non-publ., the Supreme Court noted that in any event, the person responsible for the consequences of the accident is obliged, according to Article 444 ac – to the remuneration of material damage related to the accident and, according to Article 445(1) k.c.
– to be paid for the damage suffered.
Difference in treatment Article 444(1)(2) and Article 445(1) If you are diagnosed with bodily injury or inducing a health disorder, this is because of the material damage from first the provision must, in principle, be fully covered, where, in the meantime, the judgment of redress, and in particular its amount, depends on the circumstances discovered in full, and in particular on both the duration and effects of the accident or the duration and severity of the illness, and and of the kind, as well as the degree of guilt of the perpetrator and the feelings of the victim.
Heading Article 445 which leaves, at the will of the legislator, the freedom of the court to determine the amount of compensation and allows, in the circumstances of the case, to take into account the individual characteristics and subjective feelings of the injured person (so SN in the judgment of 19 May 1998, II CKN 756/97, nopubl.).
Interest payment on compensation
As regards interest on compensation, the Supreme Court stated in its judgment of 18 February 2011 I CSK 243/10, in which it indicated that if the debtor does not pay compensation within the time limit resulting from the special provision or within the time limit set in accordance with Article 455 in fine k.c., the rightholder has no doubt the opportunity to benefit from the compensation already due to him. Consequently, interest on late payment should be due to the rightholder by that date.
In the event of damage to an offence, interest shall be due to the injured person as soon as the claim for compensation has been lodged by him. According to Article 455 k.c. at the moment, it becomes a chargeable obligation for the offender to fulfil the benefit.
The time limit for the performance of the benefit by the debtor should be ‘immediate’, understood as ‘real’, in which the debtor will be able to pay, taking into account all the circumstances of the case. Currently, the interest compensation function outweighs their valorisation function.
In that situation, the award of interest from the date of the judgment leads in fact to their redemption for the period prior to the judgment and constitutes an unjustified advantage for the debtor, sometimes prompting him to delay the delayed payment as long as possible, pending the decision of the court abolishing the obligation to pay the interest for the earlier period.
The decision of the court granting compensation is a declaratory decision, not a constitutional decision (Case of the Court of Appeal in Warsaw of 28 October 2011 VI ACa 247/11).
Necessity of redress Article 445(1) k.c. and the related obligation to pay interest for delay shall be due on the date of service of the notice to the debtor before the action is brought or the copy of the application (possibly the letter extending the action, unless the extension took place at the trial in the presence of the debtor).
From the nature of the benefit Article 445(1) k.c., whose amount depends on the assessment of the extent of the damage, the nature of its nature is difficult to quantify and dependent on a number of circumstances related to the consequences of bodily injury or health disorder, it follows that the obligation to comply with it immediately arises after the debtor has been called upon and that interest for delay is due from that point on (SN judgment of 18 September 1970, OSNCP 1971, item 103).
Author:
Nikol Małaszewska-Dąbrowska
Manager at the Legal Department. From 2011 It provides advice to leading companies from various sectors of the economy. He has extensive experience in conducting comprehensive projects in the field of national and international law. It participates in legal and tax reviews conducted to identify risks. He is also the author of numerous articles on tax issues, published in the industry press.