Ocena zgodności z Konstytucją art. 767 3a Kodeksu postępowania cywilnego w zakresie, w jakim nie przewiduje skargi na orzeczenie referendarza w przedmiocie skargi na czynności komornika sądowego
Assessment of conformity to the Constitution of Article 767 3a of the Code of Civil Procedure as regards the lack of possibility to appeal against a court referendary’s decision regarding complaint regarding bailiff’s activities

Summary/Abstract: According to the author of the proposed Sejm’s draft position the indicated provision, being the subject of the Warsaw District Court’s question of law, conforms to the Constitution. Court referendaries perform tasks related to legal protection, other than in administration of justice. In case of filling a complaint against a court referendary’s decision in enforcement proceedings, the court shall hear the case as a court of second instance, in accordance with the provisions on appeals. The complaint against the decision may be appealed only in cases, in which a court decision may be appealed. Proceeding complaints against bailiff’s activities does not constitute “a case” with the meaning of Article 45 para. 1 of the Constitution. The legal norm, pursuant to which it is not possible to appeal against the court referendary’s decision on the complaint regarding bailiff’s activities, does not infringe the constitutional principle of procedural /justice.

• Details
• Contents