Najlepsze ceny Specjalne oferty dla członków klubu książki PWE Najtańsza dostawa
Przegląd Ustawodawstwa Gospodarczego nr 01/2012

Przegląd Ustawodawstwa Gospodarczego nr 01/2012

ISSN: 0137-5490
Dostępność: Produkt niedostępny
Liczba stron: 32
Rok wydania: 2012
Miejsce wydania: Warszawa
Oprawa: miękka
49.00

Zapytaj

SPIS TREŚCI
 

Prof. dr hab. Wojciech Pyzioł, Uniwersytet Jagielloński
Prof.dr hab. Anna Walaszek-Pyzioł, Uniwersytet Jagielloński
Ustawa z 2011 r. o usługach płatniczych a umowa rachunku bankowego
Summary
The Payment Services Act from 2011 and  the Bank Account Contract
On  September,24. 2011 the new law related to payment services (Payment Services Act) came into force. This Act-based on provisions of EU-Directive from 2007 on payment services in European internal market-results many serious changes of legal position of banks (which remain admittedly not exclusive but still main payment services suppliers).This  legal position was previously regulated only in Civil Code from 1965 (Art.725-733), in Banking Law from 1997 and also in general terms of bank account contracts. The aim of this paper is a presentation of “new” bank’s rights and duties in respect payment services resulting from a bank account contract which pro futuro falls not only under above mentioned legal sources but also under provisions of Payment Services Act.   
 
Dr hab. Rafał Adamus, Uniwersytet Opolski
Skutki bezskuteczności czynności upadłego w rozumieniu art. 134 Prawa upadłościowego i naprawczego
Summary
The results of the ineffectiveness of the bankrupt’s acts in art. 134 of the Bankruptcy and Reorganization Law
The paper deals with the problem of the results of the ineffectiveness of the bankrupt’s  acts in art. 134 of the Bankruptcy and Reorganization Law. Article 134 section 1 stipulates that if an act of the bankrupt is ineffective by virtue of law or if it has been declared as ineffective, all property that as a result of the mentioned act has been transferred out of the bankrupt’s estate or has not been contributed to it (“the benefit”) shall be transferred to the bankruptcy estate. When transfer of this property in kind is not possible, equal value in money should be paid to the bankruptcy estate. Article 134 section 2 provides that in those circumstances, the “reciprocal performance” of a third party shall be returned to that person if it is found in the bankruptcy estate as separate from other assets, or if the bankruptcy estate is enriched by it. If the performance is not subject to return, the third party is entitled to claim in the bankruptcy proceedings. In the paper is put the idea that under the above mentioned regulation it is possible to transfer the ownership of the benefit (for example immovable property) to the bankruptcy estate. There is a remarkable difference between the effects of the ineffectiveness of the bankrupt’s act the effects of the ineffectiveness of the debtor’s act under the Civil Code.
 
Dr  Małgorzata Sieradzka, Uczelnia Łazarskiego w Warszawie
Dochodzenie roszczeń odszkodowawczych z tytułu naruszenia unijnego i krajowego prawa konkurencji (część I)
Summary
Pursuing claims on the grounds of infringement of the EU and national competition law (part I)
Claiming damages by the claimant's undertakings on the grounds of infringement  of the EU (art. 101 and art. 102 TFEU )1 and national competition rules (art. 6 and 9 Act on Competition and Consumer Protection)2 is covered by a model of private enforcement of competition protection. Implementation of competition rules on private law basis means bringing private actions for damages on the grounds of infringement of the EU or national competition rules before national common courts. From the point of view of protection of interests of the undertakings injured as a result of violation of competition rules, claiming damages becomes of the key importance. Nowadays actions taken at the EU level are more focused on an issue of a private liability for damages arising from infringement of competition law, as the practice shows, on one hand, underestimation of civil law instruments in combating practices that restrict and, on the other hand, the primacy of public model of competition law.  The aim of this paper is to outline practical problems in an efficient functioning of a model of private enforcement of competition law in civil-law proceedings. The paper also presents the consequences of practices restricting competition, decision making basis for enforcement of competition law infringement, and discusses common courts competencies to apply competition rules.
 
KONSULTACJE
Mgr Paweł Lewandowski, Uniwersytet Warmińsko-Mazurski
Koncesja na działalność gospodarczą w zakresie prowadzenia kasyna gry
Summary
Concession for business activity in a scope of running a casino
The importance of gaining concessions is the greatest form of interference by the state regarding freedom of business activity. Therefore, it should apply only in such special situations as when a proposed business activity has fundamental and strategic meaning for the state. 
By virtue of the Gambling Act of 2009 that allows the running of a legal casino, licensing has been replaced by a required concession. Legislators claim that the change is essential because of the necessity to repair the gambling market, to intensify state control in this area, and to limit the public menace of gambling addiction. 
According to article 46.3 of the Freedom of Business Activity Act, enforcing a concession is possible only when other forms of state control are insufficient. This should be considered if enforced changes in running a casino are justified, especially because of the time needed to enact the Gambling Act, plus its political context. It is also worth mentioning that this act excludes the Freedom of Business Activity Act according to the granting of, the refusal to grant, the change of, and the withdrawal of a concession for running a casino. Such a situation can cause the formal conditions of granting a concession for running a casino to be fully regulated in only one legal act. 
This paper considers whether or not the requirement of a concession is justified, and if it is proportional to guaranteed protection. Taking into consideration all circumstances -- especially the actual regulations and the limited discretion of a concession authority decision -- a licence requirement alone should be adequate.
 
KONFERENCJA
Prof. dr hab. Stanisława Kalus, Uniwersytet Śląski
Dr Mariusz Śladkowski, Uniwersytet Śląski
Nielegalny pobór energii – sądowe dochodzenie roszczeń (14 grudnia 2011 r.)

Odbiór osobisty 0 zł
Kurier 14 zł
Darmowa dostawa w Klubie Książki dla zamówień od 200 zł