Journal of Business Law 04/2021

A purpose of the article is the analysis of legal solutions concerning opposition proceedings on a trade mark application adopted by the legislator in the Industrial Property Law and their comparison to the Union procedure for opposition. The provisions of both substantive and procedural law on opposition proceedings in trade mark law in relation to several recent amendments of the Industrial Property Law have been assessed herein. The following aspects of legal solutions contained in the Polish Law and the Union procedure for opposition have been compared herein: entities who have standing to file a notice of opposition, grounds and time limits to file a notice of opposition, examination of admissibility of the opposition, a course of opposition proceedings, and the procedure for the examination of the opposition that has been deemed unfounded by the applicant. Furthermore, the article has voiced some criticism against certain solutions adopted by the Polish legislator which refer, among others, to incomplete regulation of opposition proceedings in trade mark law, a narrowed group of entities empowered to file a notice of opposition, a need to make the content of an opposition more precise, and unjustified abolition of the examination of an opposition in the course of adversarial proceedings. The considerations made herein resulted in the formulation of conclusions de lege ferenda.

The subject-matter of the elaboration is the mechanism of treaty shopping which is used not only for tax optimization but also tax avoidance. The main beneficiaries of this mechanism are groups of companies running cross-border activity. A special aspect that undergoes analysis in this article are the methods of countering treaty shopping. The issue is directly concerned with the aspects of both domestic tax law and international double taxation agreements. The mechanism of treaty shopping is also connected with the problem of withholding tax. The purpose of the elaboration is to evaluate the effectiveness of the methods of countering treaty shopping in connection with the operation of international holding companies.

Since 2016 the Bank Guarantee Fund (BGF) has been authorized to impose fines on entities (banks, brokerage houses and credit unions) that violate certain obligations under their special resolution regime. The act sets the maximum amount of fines at the level of PLN 100 million, but gives the BGF free hand to apply lower fines. The directives for mitigating the amount of the fine leave the BFG a large scope of freedom of action. The catalogue of violations of the law for which a fine may be imposed is comprehensively formulated, but it is possible to repeatedly apply the penalty to the same entity who persistently violates the law. The proceeds from the fines go to the state budget, but in this respect an amendment to the act has been proposed, consisting in leaving these proceeds at the disposal of the BGF for the purpose of financing the restructuring measures. It has been shown that the fines imposed by the BGF are not only a sanction for violation of the law, but also a legal measure, the application of which should improve the effectiveness of the implementation of special resolution regime processes by entities avoiding cooperation with the BGF in this respect. In conclusion, it has been assessed that the fines imposed by the BGF are of a specific nature determined by many factors, including the status and tasks of the BGF, the purposes of applying these fines, as well as the place and role of domestic entities on the financial market. The final effect of properly conducted special resolution regime is not only to prevent the bankruptcy of a specific entity, but also to improve the situation on the financial market in general.

The subject of this article is the register of shareholders of a private joint-stock company and a simple joint-stock company maintained in the form of a distributed, decentralized database, in particular using blockchain technology. It addresses the issue of the form of shares of non-public companies and the model of their dematerialisation; the register of shareholders and the obligations of the entity keeping this register. In this article I present the thesis that regulations regarding the shareholder register kept in the form of a distributed and decentralized database should be interpreted in the light of the provisions shaping the general function of the shareholder register as the basic mechanism for exercising shareholders' rights and trading the shares. Therefore, the construction of such a register of shareholders must ensure not only the integrity of the data contained therein but above all the correctness of corporate relations in the company.

In recent years, the domestic market for investment funds has been witnessing a trend towards consolidation of this market, which — although at first glance it seems to be a phenomenon characteristic only of private law — has its specific private and public law aspects. The most important element within this process is the PFSA's power to control the capital flows occurring within a given financial institution, i.e. a given investment fund company. The main idea of this regulation is to prevent a takeover of control over a given TFI and to prevent gaining significant influence over TFI management by shareholders who do not ensure correct functioning of the TFI and do not provide stability and security for its further activity. This mechanism is in fact composed of two parts. First, i.e. the notification mechanism, under which the PFSA has been provided with powers to object to an intention of direct or indirect acquisition or subscription for shares or rights attached to shares of the TFI, in a number ensuring reaching or exceeding, respectively, 10%, 20%, one-third, 50% of the total number of votes at the general meeting or participation in the share capital. Secondly — which will be analysed in this publication — the mechanism of the PFSA's decision regarding the prohibition on exercising voting rights from TFI shares or prohibition on exercising rights of the TFI parent entity. Taking into account the fact that this decision has effects both in the sphere of administrative and commercial law, and that it remains outside the mainstream of doctrinal interest, it is appropriate to characterise this decision, the procedure for its issuance, as well as the legal consequences of its entry into legal circulation, in a closer and detailed manner.

The aim of the article is to discuss the consequences of the expiry of the validity period time of the offer submitted in the public procurement procedure and to evaluate the solution introduced to the Public Procurement Law of 2019 from the perspective of the Civil Code, which establishes the general legal regime for economic transactions. According to civil law, an offer that ceases to bind expires so acceptance of such an offer does not lead to a legal relationship (contractual or pre-contractual). The Public Procurement Law of 2004 did not regulate the effects of the expiry of the offer's validity period, which was the source of doctrinal disputes and discrepancies in jurisprudence. The judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Case C-35/17 has dispelled these doubts only to some extent. The solution adopted in the Public Procurement Law of 2019 entitles the contractor to express a consent to the conclusion of the contract, which in the civil sense is a renewal of the offer. The model designed as a compromise between ensuring the effectiveness of tender procedures and the need to be consistent with the basic structures of civil law raises a number of doubts. It creates a non-tender phase of the public procurement procedure, which makes it difficult to describe the legal situation of the participants using traditional civil law terminology.

The aim of the article is to present the nature of the relationship between the foundation act and the foundation's statute in the context of the notarial procedure. In particular, the duties of a notary public, including the preparation of both acts, were discussed. The study also analyzes the notary's obligation to assess whether the property indicated in the foundation deed is sufficient to achieve the foundation's goals.

The question of determining the legal situation of the individual in environmental protection law, especially with regard to the formulation of his or her asserted rights and freedoms, has been gaining an increasing legal recognition in recent years. The dynamics of climate change and the successive degradation of the environment, combined with the growing social awareness, have now clearly revealed the need to create a legal system of environmental protection that would enable effective protection of appropriate living conditions for humans not only in the area of public law, but also private law. The practical importance of this problem reflects in the legal issue posed by the District Court in Gliwice and referred to be resolved by the Supreme Court.

The aim of the gloss is to present arguments in favor of the admissibility of formulating a personal right in the form of the right to the environment as a subjective right protecting personal rights related to the environment.