KILKA REFLEKSJI NA TEMAT STANU CYWILISTYCZNEJ APARATURY POJĘCIOWEJ UŻYWANEJ W DYSKURSIE O PODMIOTOWOŚCI PRAWNEJ
A FEW REFLECTIONS ON THE STATE OF CIVIL LAW CONCEPTUAL APPARATUS USED IN THE DISCOURSE ON LEGAL SUBJECTIVITY

Summary/Abstract: The author analyses five legal concepts: a natural person, a legal person, a defective legal person (Article 33¹ of Polish Civil Code), the Fiscus (State Treasury) and a public law person. Although the term ‘natural person’ is widely used, the author advocates removing this concept from law. In his opinion, this concept is a relic of the extreme form of conceptual jurisprudence, which is an efflorescence of the extreme form of legal positivism. According to the author, this concept is not compatible with modern trends aimed at the constitutionalization of civil law, and especially with contemporary concepts of human rights. The author notes that this concept does not appear in the Polish Constitution. The author also considers the concept of Fiscus (State Treasury) to be a relic. In his opinion, this is a kind of anachronism, and thus a relic of the former concept of the Fiscus, which prevailed in the nineteenth century. This concept diverts attention from the real essence of the state as the subject of law. The author is also in favour of removing the concept of ‘legal person of public law’ from civil law discourse. This notion migrated from the study of administrative law to civil law discourse. It is a relic of the methodology widely used by specialists in administrative law in the nineteenth century. This method consisted in borrowing certain concepts from the science of civil law and adopting them in the science of administrative law. According to the author, under civil law, this concept does not have sufficient normative and cognitive values. The author also draws attention to the nature of the concept of ‘legal person’. In his view, contrary to the concept of ‘defective legal person’, it is a primary concept in the language of the law and the language of legal discourse. Therefore, it cannot be defined.

• Details
• Contents