Orzecznictwo Naczelnego Sądu Administracyjnego
Judicial decisions of the Supreme Administrative Court

Summary/Abstract: With reference to complaints against legal instruments or measures brought before administrative courts, provided for in Article 3(2)(4) of the Law on Proceedings before Administrative Courts, a complaint may be filed no sooner than one day after serving a notice to rectify the infringement of law, without wait for a response to the notice from an administrative authority. The provision of Article 89(1)(2) of the Gambling Act does not constitute a technical regulation for the purposes of Article 1(11) of the Directive 98/34/ EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations and rules on information society services – a draft of which the European Commission should be notified about – and may be the basis for the imposition of a pecuniary penalty for a breach of the Gambling Act. Operators of slot machine gambling outside casinos are subject to the pecuniary penalty provided for in Article 89(1)(2) of the Gambling Act, regardless of whether they hold a concession or a permit or obtained an entry or required registration of the slot machines or gaming devices. A decision imposing a requirement to present expert assessment of the technical condition of a structure or its part, following a prior imposition of a requirement to carry out an inspection of the structure, is subject to interlocutory appeal. An individual who took part in administrative proceedings but failed to lodge a complaint acquires the status of a participant in the proceedings with the rights of a party and associated procedural rights if the outcome of the proceedings concerns his or her legal interests, and only if the proceedings seek to consider the merits of the claim. The judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal, court file No. P 46/13, in which the Tribunal held that Article 156(2) of the Code of Administrative Procedure – to the extent to which it does not rule out the admissibility of a declaration of invalidity regarding a decision issued in blatant breach of the law when a significant period of time has elapsed since the decision was issued and the decision was the basis for acquiring a right or an expectative – violates democratic principles and the rule of law, demonstrates the need to attach greater significance to the principle of stability of legal and administrative relations and certainty in legal transactions than has been provided for in the Code of Administrative Procedure. The register of public spending contracts is considered public information due to its content and the content of the contracts. Legal interest regarding an application requesting access to data from the PESEL (Universal Electronic System of Population Register) database does not arise from merely declaring the future institution of court proceedings against the person the request concerns, in particular if there is no relation between the applicant and that person. The right of access to medical records is vested in the patient, thereby the patient has the right to choose the manner of disclosing the medical records with a view to satisfying his or her needs to protect his or her life and health. Taxpayers who sell parts of their personal property in an organized and consistent manner, seeking to generate profit, are considered to be carrying out business activity. Provisions of Articles 37, 40 and 42 of Construction Law do not condition issuing decisions on whether individuals investing in structures erected without required building permits had the right to use real property for construction purposes at the time the structure was built. Placing a structure on a plot of land other than the one stipulated in the building permit does not constitute a material departure from the approved construction project or other conditions of the building permit, but instead is an instance of illegal construction. When naming the entities entitled to compensation for real property taken for road investment purposes, administrative authorities have to rely upon the Land and Mortgage Register with respect to entries concerning the ownership of said real property. With regard to determining compensation for expropriated real property, a judgment issued by a general jurisdiction court adjudicating on the subject of updating an entry in the Land and Mortgage Register according to the current legal circumstances does not constitute a preliminary issue provided for in Article 97(1)(4) of the Code of Administrative Procedure.

• Details
• Contents