The aim of the discussion is to determine the place of biometric electronic signatures (the so-called dynamic signature, or in short – biometric signature) within the general structure of electronic signatures under the eIDAS Regulation and to indicate whether the processing of personal data from dynamic signatures will in all cases be subject to the restrictions of Article 9(1) of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The lack of a legal definition of a dynamic signature, its technical nature and specific formula, combined with the characteristics of biometric data under the GDPR, raise significant interpretative doubts. The problem mainly concerns the classification of personal data processed (collected) when creating a digital version of a handwritten signature. The analysis leads to the conclusion that not every use of a dynamic signature involves the processing of biometric data within the meaning of the GDPR. Signature data will be treated as biometric only in specific situations where it is processed using special techniques for the purpose of identifying or authenticating a natural person. The authors thus point to the need for the controller to assess the context of personal data processing on a case-by-case basis, as it is the purpose and manner of use of the technology that determines whether dynamic signature data qualifies as biometric data within the meaning of the GDPR.

Ensuring the quality of water intended for human consumption is crucial for the health of consumers. For this reason, a system of external supervision of water quality by the authorities of the State Sanitary Inspectorate was introduced. The administrative nature of the supervision allows it to qualify as an area of administrative (sanitary) police activity. The model of water quality supervision is based on the application by the bodies of the Inspectorate of general regulations on sanitary supervision and specific instruments applicable to water quality supervision. Analysis of the various institutions aimed at ensuring the health safety of water made it possible to determine the insufficient degree of regulation of water quality supervision and the design flaws of supervisory instruments.

The fashion industry has for some years been undergoing a slow evolution towards more sustainable practices. In recent times both law and technology, in particular, connected technology have been acting as catalysts towards this goal. These shifts are widely embraced by many of today's key consumers. But a paradigm shift in any industry, especially one that mixes technology and sustainability, triggers inevitable legal consequences which must be examined and resolved. The aim of this article is to examine the impact of consumer trends, sustainability and the various pieces of legislation identified in the text on the business strategies of fashion brands in the post-COVID fashion revolution era, in order to identify effective adaptation of legislative measures that will allow them to maintain their position in the market and improve their financial performance. It has been claimed that customers crave fashion, but they have ecological concerns and a conscientious approach to consumption. Reportedly, they are prepared to buy fewer, better-quality and environmentally friendly products at the higher price these priorities imply. This paper will shed light on the legal externalities, concerns and stimuli towards building a sustainable fashion brand.

The manifestation of the institution of incompatibility of positions in the law of local self-government is, inter alia, 24f par. 2 of the Act of 8 March 1990 on Commune Self-government (u.s.g.). The principles of prevention of corruption in the local government set out in the acts are the subject of numerous critical remarks in the science of law. In particular, the relationship between art. 2 par. 6, art. 4 and art. 6 par. 1 of the Act of 21 August 1997 on Limitation of Conducting Business Activity by Persons Performing Public Functions in relation to art. 24f par. 2 u.s.g. is problematic. Problems also arise from the issue of being members of the management or control and audit authorities as well as proxies of commercial companies with the participation of legal persons of any local government units or entrepreneurs in which such persons participate, by persons indicated in art. 24f par. 2 u.s.g. Indicated specific issues was devoted to this study.