Podstawy odpowiedzialności odszkodowawczej za przymusowe pozbawienie wolności w związku z wydaniem europejskiego nakazu aresztowania. Uwagi na tle orzecznictwa sądów karnych i cywilnych
Grounds for liability in damages for compulsory deprivation of liberty in connection with the issuing of the European arrest warrant

Summary/Abstract: The Supreme Court in the resolution of February 25, 2021, I KZP 5/20 ruled that compensation and redress for actual deprivation of liberty applied by a foreign state to a prosecuted person as a result of issuing an EAW by a Polish court may be pursued under Art. 552 § 4 of the CCP. The resolution is of great practical importance, as it dispels doubts about the possibility of proceedings by the criminal court in cases of claims for deprivation of liberty due to the issuance of EAW by the Polish court. Before the resolution was is-sued, cases of this type were also adjudicated by the civil court under the provisions of Art. 417 et seq. of the CC. Civil courts held the position that there was no exclusion of general provisions under Art. 421 of the CC. The aim of this article is to analyse, in terms of the adopted liability principle, judgements of civil and criminal courts relating to compensation for damages for compul-sory deprivation of liberty as a result of issuing an EAW by the Polish court. The criminal proceedings pursuing claims under Art. 552 of the CCP is based on strict liability, while the civil law regulations contained in Art. 417 et seq. of the CC such liability was formed based on illegality. Against the background of the analyzed court judgements, the conclusion is drawn that the assessment of the legitimacy of claims made by civil and criminal courts, despite different rules of liability, remained convergent with each other.

• Details
• Contents