FAQ

Attorney-at-Law

Search results

simple search

search np. “cognitive architectures” AND 1993-200 NOT Urban
advanced search
ex. 1234-6789
ex. 10.4467/16890027AP.16.022.6009
ex. Uniwersytet Jagielloński

On the unconstitutionality of the remuneration policy for attorneys-at-law who provide ex-officio legal aid

Publication date: 31.10.2022

Attorney-at-Law, 2022, 2 (31), pp. 357 - 371

https://doi.org/10.4467/23921943RP.22.040.16903

Authors

Monika Florczak-Wątor
Jagiellonian University in Kraków, Gołębia 24, 31-007 Kraków, Poland
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4324-5652 Orcid
All publications →

Pobierz pełny tekst

Download PDF PDF
Print print Cite cite Share share

Titles

On the unconstitutionality of the remuneration policy for attorneys-at-law who provide ex-officio legal aid

Abstract

The paper discloses the reasons why the principles of remunerating attorneys-at-law who provide legal aid ex officio do not meet constitutional standards as well as indicates the resulting legal consequences. The author concludes that differentiating the remuneration of attorneys-at-law appointed by a party to the proceedings and attorneys-at-law appointed by the court for the same activities undertaken as part of the legal aid provided is unconstitutional, especially in the light of the conclusions resulting from the analysis of the judgement of the Constitutional Tribunal of 23 April 2020, file ref. SK 66/19. The paper also interprets the possible ways of removing the aforementioned unconstitutionality in the process of judicial application of the law, which may be significant before the compliance with the Constitution of the principles for remuneration of attorneys-at-law providing ex officio legal aid will be ensured by the legislator. 

Keywords

References

Download references
Literature
Argumenty i rozumowania prawnicze w konstytucyjnym państwie prawa. Komentarz [Arguments and legal reasoning in the constitutional state of law. A Commentary], M. Florczak-Wątor, A. Grabowski (ed.), Kraków 2021.
Barszcz T., Struktura argumentuma simili [The structure of a simili argumentum], Lublin 2015.
Biernat S., Glosa do orzeczenia TK z 12 XII 1994, K 3/94 [A gloss to the judgement of the Constitutional Tribunal of 12 December1994, K 3/94], “Państwo i Prawo” [“State and Law”] 1995, No. 8, pp. 102–106.
Dębowska A., Florczak-Wątor M., Domniemanie konstytucyjności ustawy w świetleorzecznictwa Trybunału Konstytucyjnego [Presumption of constitutionality of a statute in the light of the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Tribunal], “Przegląd Konstytucyjny” [“The Constitutional Review”] 2017, No. 2, pp. 5–37.
Garlicki L., Polskie prawo konstytucyjne. Zarys wykładu [Polish constitutional law. Outline of the lecture], Warsaw 2021.
Garlicki L., Sądy a Konstytucja Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej [Courts and the Constitution of the Republic of Poland], “Przegląd Sądowy” [“The Judicial Review”] 2016, No. 7–8, pp. 7–25.
Gutowski M., Kardas P., Domniemanie konstytucyjności a kompetencje sądów [Presumption of constitutionality and the competences of courts], “Palestra” [“The Bar”] 2016, No. 5, pp. 44–62.
Jabłońska P., Konstytucyjne podstawy rozproszonej kontroli konstytucyjności prawa [The constitutional foundations of the dispersed control of the constitutionality of the law],“Przegląd Sądowy” [“The Judicial Review”] 2020, No. 11–12, pp. 21–33.
Konstytucja Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej. Komentarz [The Constitution of the Republic of Poland. A Commentary], ed. P. Tuleja, Warsaw 2019.
Kruk M., Zasada równości w orzecznictwie Trybunału Konstytucyjnego [The principle of equality in the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Tribunal], [in:] Księga XX-lecia orzecznictwa Trybunału Konstytucyjnego [Book of the 20th anniversary of the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Tribunal], ed. M. Zubik, Warsaw 2006.
Nowacki J., Analogia legis, Warsaw 1966.
Radziewicz P., Wzruszenie „domniemania konstytucyjności” aktu normatywnego przez Trybunał Konstytucyjny [Rebuttal of the “presumption of constitutionality” of a normative act by the Constitutional Tribunal], “Przegląd Sejmowy” [“The Sejm Review”] 2008, No. 5, pp. 55–86.
Szymanek K., Argument z podobieństwa [Argument from similarity], Katowice 2008.
Wiliński P., Konstytucyjne granice prawa do obrony w procesie karnym[The constitutional limits of the right to defence in a criminal trial], “Palestra” [“The Bar”] 2007, No. 5–6, pp. 40–52.
Zajadło J., Idea równości we współczesnej filozofii prawa i filozofii polityki [The idea of equality in contemporary philosophy of law and philosophy of politics],“Przegląd Sejmowy” [“The Sejm Review”] 2011, No. 6, pp. 11–30.
Ziółkowski M., Zasada równości w prawie [The principle of equality in law], “Państwo i Prawo” [“State and Law”] 2015, No. 5, pp. 94–111.
Zubik M., Konstytucyjne aspekty prawa wyboru obrony i obrońcy w sprawach karnych w perspektywie orzecznictwa Trybunału Konstytucyjnego [Constitutional aspects of the right to choose a defence and a criminal defence attorney in the perspective of the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Tribunal], “Europejski Przegląd Sądowy” [“The European Judiciary Review”] 2019, No. 1, pp. 11–16.
Legal acts
Act of 6 July 1982 on attorneys-at-law (Journal of Laws of 2022, item 1166, as amended).
Regulation of the Minister of Justice of 22 October 2015 on fees for the activities of attorneys-at-law (Journal of Laws of 2018, item 265, as amended).
Regulation of the Minister of Justice of 22 October 2015 on the State Treasury covering the costs of unpaid legal aid provided by a court-appointed advocate (Journal of Laws of 2015, item 1801, as amended).
Regulation of the Minister of Justice of 3 October 2016 on the State Treasury covering the costs of unpaid legal aid provided by a court-appointed advocate (Journal of Laws 2019, item 18, as amended).
Regulation of the Minister of Justice of 3 October 2016 on the State Treasury covering the costs of unpaid legal aid provided by a court-appointed attorney-at-law (Journal of Laws of 2019, item 68, as amended).
Judgements
The Case Law of the Constitutional Tribunal
Constitutional Tribunal decision of 18 November 2014, Ts 263/13.
Constitutional Tribunal decision of 19 February 1997, U 7/96.
Constitutional Tribunal decision of 24 October 2010, SK 10/01.
Constitutional Tribunal decision of 29 April 2020, S 1/20.
Constitutional Tribunal decision of 4 February 1998, Ts 1/97.
Constitutional Tribunal judgement of 15 July 2010, K 63/07.
Constitutional Tribunal judgement of 16 June 2008, P 37/07.
Constitutional Tribunal judgement of 18 July 2012, K 14/12.
Constitutional Tribunal judgement of 19 April 2011, K 19/08.
Constitutional Tribunal judgement of 20 October 1998, K 7/98.
Constitutional Tribunal judgement of 23 April 2020, SK 66/19
Constitutional Tribunal judgement of 23 April 2020, SK 66/19.
Constitutional Tribunal judgement of 23 March 2006, K 4/06.
Constitutional Tribunal judgement of 29 August 2006, SK 23/05.
Constitutional Tribunal judgement of 5 July 2011, P 14/10.
Constitutional Tribunal judgement of 6 May 1998, K 37/97.
Constitutional Tribunal ruling of 12 December 1994, K 3/94.
Constitutional Tribunal ruling of 9 March 1988, U 7/87.
The Case Law of the Supreme Court and other courts
Judgement of the District Court in Szczecin of 31 March 2021, IV Ka 85/21.
Judgement of the District Court in Zielona Góra of 14 July 2020, IV Pa 42/20.
Supreme Court decision of 13 July 2020, IV CSK 746/19.
Supreme Court decision of 15 December 2020, I CSK 438/20.
Supreme Court decision of 15 November 2020, V CSK 71/20.
Supreme Court decision of 15 September 2020, IV CSK 159/20.
Supreme Court decision of 23 July 2020, III CZ 18/20.
Supreme Court decision of 30 June 2020, V CZ 87/19.
Supreme Court decision of 30 November 2020, IV CSK 375/20.
Supreme Court decision of 30 November 2020, V CNP 15/20.
Supreme Court decision of 7 January 2020, I CSK 598/20.
Supreme Court judgement of 17 March 2016, V CSK 377/15.
Supreme Court judgement of 20 February 2018, V CSK 230/17.
Supreme Court judgement of 25 June 2020, I NO 37/20.
Supreme Court judgement of 26 September 2007, III KK 206/07.
Supreme Court judgement of 28 May 2009, II KK 334/08.
Supreme Court judgement of 9 June 2005, V KK 41/05.

Information

Information: Attorney-at-Law, 2022, 2 (31), pp. 357 - 371

Article type: Original article

Titles:

Polish:

On the unconstitutionality of the remuneration policy for attorneys-at-law who provide ex-officio legal aid

English:
On the unconstitutionality of the remuneration policy for attorneys-at-law who provide ex-officio legal aid

Authors

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4324-5652

Monika Florczak-Wątor
Jagiellonian University in Kraków, Gołębia 24, 31-007 Kraków, Poland
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4324-5652 Orcid
All publications →

Jagiellonian University in Kraków, Gołębia 24, 31-007 Kraków, Poland

Published at: 31.10.2022

Article status: Open

Licence: None

Percentage share of authors:

Monika Florczak-Wątor (Author) - 100%

Article corrections:

-

Publication languages:

English

View count: 211

Number of downloads: 176

<div id="cke_pastebin"> On the unconstitutionality of the remuneration policy for attorneys-at-law who provide ex-officio legal aid</div>
Download PDF Download xml