We comment on the case-law of administrative courts for “Legalis” Legal Information Service

In 2022, we are continuing our cooperation with the C.H. Beck Publishing House – Legalis Legal Information Service. As part of this cooperation, our lawyers comment on administrative court rulings important for practice.

The texts in the Service module: IUS.FOCUS – ADMINISTRATIVE LAW are exclusively entrusted to our Law Firm for editing, which we treat as a recognition of our Law Firm’s extensive experience in the field of law and administrative procedure. The possibility of commenting on current court rulings within IUS.FOCUS is by definition addressed to the largest law firms on a national scale.

Some of the texts edited in this way will be sent to interested recipients as part of newsletters sent out by the Publishing House.

Papers published this month:

1. ‘The legal title to a vehicle and joint and several liability for the costs of its removal’ – by attorney-at-law Jacek Krystek

2. “Manner of formulating pleas in a complaint to the Supreme Administrative Court” – by attorney-at-law Aleksandra Urbanowska-Bohun

In addition, the following texts have been published in the Service:

1. ’10 years to eliminate a decision issued in flagrant breach of law’ – barrister Krzysztof Topolewski
2. ‘A party to administrative proceedings may request a copy of the file from the authority’ – barrister Aneta Fornalik,
3. ‘The principle of persuasion when refusing to agree to a zoning decision” – barrister Aneta Fornalik,
4. “What determines whether a substance or object is waste ?” – barrister Krzysztof Topolewski
5. ‘The devisee may claim the return of the property in administrative proceedings’ – barrister Aneta Fornalik,
6. “How to count the time limit for waiving an appeal ?” – barrister Aneta Fornalik,
7. ‘The objective nature of administrative liability does not mean absolute liability’ – attorney-at-law Jacek Krystek,
8. ‘Abuse of the right to public information’ – barrister Krzysztof Topolewski,
9. ‘Completion of administrative proceedings and complaint for delay’ – barrister Aneta Fornalik,
10. ‘Obligation to inform a party of the possibility of issuing a decision’ – barrister Krzysztof Topolewski,
11. ‘Effective lodging of an objection against a decision before its service’ – barrister Aneta Fornalik,
12. ‘Occupation of a road lane in connection with a public assembly does not require a permit’ – barrister Aneta Fornalik,
13. “Conclusion of a court settlement and financial correction in the scope of granted funding” – barrister Krzysztof Topolewski