adversarial character of civil appeal proceedings ... ?· adversarial character of civil appeal...
Post on 01-Mar-2019
Embed Size (px)
Zeszyty Naukowe KUL 60 (2017), nr 3 (239)
101ZNKUL 60 (2017), nr 3 (239)
Mac i e j R z e w usk i*
Adversarial character of civil appeal proceedings selected issues
1. Introductory notes
Established principles constitute the elementary component of any law sys-tem. They determine the legally binding norms that hold priority over other components of aparticular legal order1. Furthermore, principles of law also play numerous different functions they set trends in legislative processes and determine the methods for interpreting regulations of law. Thus, they are an inseparable component of aparticular legal order and remain suitable for acknowledging and appropriate interpretation of applicable legal regulations2.
Among the particular branches of law, one can also distinguish the so-called primary principles of law. They mirror the basic assumptions of aspecific area of law. Adversarial principle is regarded as one of such principles within the field of civil proceeding. In the most general approach, the principle indicates the burden that rests on the parties presenting factual situation and invoking
* Dr Maciej Rzewuski Katedra Postpowania Cywilnego, Uniwersytet Warmisko-Mazurski wOlsztynie, e-mail: email@example.com
1 See H.Mdrzak, Opojmowaniu naczelnych zasad postpowania cywilnego, [in:] Proces iprawo. Rozprawy prawnicze, ed. E.towska, Wrocaw-Warsaw 1989, page389 and next. [Comprehending primary principles of civil proceeding]; H.Kupiszewski, Prawo rzymskie awspczesno, Warsaw1988, p.113 and next. [Roman law and modernity]; W.Dajczak, T.Giaro, F.Longchamps de Brier, Prawo rzymskie. Upodstaw prawa prywatnego, Warsaw 2014, p.162 and next. [Roman law. Basics of private law]; P.Pogonowski, Znaczenie rzymskich paremii procesowych dla wspczesnej procedury cywilnej, [in:] Staroytne kodyfikacje prawa, ed. A.Dbiski, Lublin 2000, p.187 and next. [Value of Roman process maxims for modern civil procedure]
2 J. Gudowski, Okilku naczelnych zasadach procesu cywilnego wczoraj, dzi, jutro, [On Some Fundamental Principles of Civil Proceedings Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow] [in:] Prawo pry-watne czasu przemian. Ksiga pamitkowa dedykowana profesorowi Stanisawowi Sotysiskiemu, ed.A.Nowicka, Pozna 2005, p. 1015-1029. [Private Law in aPeriod of Changes. ACommemorative Book in Honour of Professor Stanisaw Sotysiski]
ZNKUL 60 (2017), nr 3 (239)
evidence to support it. Under this rule, the cognition of civil court is limited solely to assessing the evidence introduced by parties and providing asuitable decision on this basis3.
According to assumptions of the legislator, introduction of the adversarial principle ought to significantly contribute to creating aquick and efficient mechanism for bringing to justice based on evidence invoked by the parties. Winning the court case ought to constitute areward for appropriate fulfillment of ones law-imposed obligation to present rationale4.
2. Adversarial principle historical background.
The adversary system of civil proceedings in Poland was subject to significant evolution. The need for applying it occurred within the doctrine by the end of the 19th century. Some authors deemed this principle as an element of availability of the process which limits the role of court for conducting legal assessment of evidence presented by parties and thus, guarantees impartiality of judges5. On the other hand, those who favor the inquisitorial system identify the adversarial principle as alimitation of the principle of material truth6.
In 1930, despite significant differences of approach, it was finally agreed to introduce the adversarial principle into Code of Civil Procedure. Besides certain regulations deemed exceptional in character (such as Article 244, Article 266
3 J. Jodowski, Z. Resich, J. Lapierre, T. Misiuk-Jodowska, K. Weitz, Postpowanie cywilne, Warsaw 2010, p. 128 [Civil proceeding]; P. Marciniak, Zasada kontradyktoryjnoci aewolucja iwspczesny ksztat postpowania cywilnego zarys problematyki, Przegld Prawniczy Uniwer-sytetu im. Adama Mickiewicza 2013, no 1, p. 97. [Adversarial principle and modern shape of civil proceeding overview of problem]
4 See also P. Marciniak, Zasada kontradyktoryjnoci, p. 111. [Adversarial principle and modern shape of civil proceeding overview of problem]
5 See K.Piasecki, Postpowanie sporne rozpoznawcze wsprawach cywilnych, Warsaw 2011, p.86 [Litigation in civil cases]; M.Waligrski, Polskie prawo procesowe wwietle zasady kontradyktoryjnoci, SC 1963, p.12 and next [Polish Law of Civil Procedure. Function and Structure of the Proceedings]; Z.Resich, Zasada dyspozycyjnoci ikontradyktoryjnoci wprocesie cywilnym PRL, PiP 1957, z. 7-8, p. 64. [The Principle of aFree Exercise by the Parties of Their Rights and Adversarial Principle in Civil Proceedings of Peoples Republic of Poland]
6 W. Broniewicz, Zasada kontradyktoryjnoci procesu cywilnego wpogldach nauki polskiej (1880-1980), [The Principle of Adversarial Civil Proceedings in the Views of Polish Legal Doctrine (1880-1980)], [in:] Studia zprawa postpowania cywilnego. Ksiga pamitkowa ku czci Zbigniewa Resicha, ed. M. Jdrzejewska, T. Ereciski, Warsaw 1985, p. 39 and next. [Studies on Civil Procedural Law. Commemorative Book in Honour of Zbigniew Resich],; A.Jakubecki, Naczelne zasady postpowania cywilnego wwietle nowelizacji kodeksu postpowania cywilnego, [in:] Czterdziestolecie kodeksu postpowania cywilnego. Zjazd katedr postpowania cywilnego wZakopanem, Krakw 2006, p.351-352. [Forty years of Code of Civil Procedure. Rally of departments of civil proceeding in Zakopane]
ZNKUL 60 (2017), nr 3 (239)
adveRsaRial chaRacteR of civil appeal pRoceedings selected issues
and Article 323), which provide the court the possibility of take evidence ex officio, the whole act was based on the principle of formal truth.
This was also recognized by the judicature of that period. For example, it is worth referring to the ruling of Supreme Court of 28th February 1935, III C 1217/34, where it was underlined that if the parties cannot know in advance which circumstances or evidence will be decisive for making judgment, they ought to present material that either provides grounds for the claim or defend against complainants claim in full. Therefore, Article 404 indicates the need to present the whole evidence in the 1st instance. The role of the appeal instance is to control the appropriate proceeding and supervise suitable application of material law (). As for determining the material truth () the Code of Civil Procedure contains regulations that taken out of the whole might speak against the principle of supporting the dispute by parties, such as Article 244, second sentence of Article 245 1, Article 304, Article 316, Article 323 of Code of Civil Procedure. Nonetheless, this covers occasional provisions as generally only the circumstances and evidence invoked by parties are taken into account. Thus, no principle of establishing absolute truth can be derived from the abovemen-tioned provisions7.
In addition, in the justification of this ruling, in relation to ruling of 5thApril1935, C III 101/348, it was established that in fact, the concept of abil-ity and the need to point to facts and evidence () ought to be applied relatively. This means that specific circumstances of aparticular case are of significant importance, especially the personal properties of each party. The party which has no ability to refer to either aggressive or defensive material ought to be treated differently from the party that, after thorough consideration of such material, is able to determine which facts and evidence would be decisive for the judgment of the case9.
After some time, source literature started to recognize and underline the advantages of the adversarial principle. The most significant advantages include: aim for effective discovery of the truth, correlation with the private character of cases dealt during the proceeding, encouraging activity of the parties, providing the judge with an opportunity to maintain the status of an impartial arbiter and removing the risk of excessive responsibility of judges10. Nonetheless, the
7 LEX no 1634523.8 LEX no. 329816.9 Justification of Supreme Court ruling of 28th February 1935, III C 1217/34.10 W. Siedlecki, Zasada kontradyktoryjnoci wpolskim procesie cywilnym, PiP 1953, z. 2, p. 233
[Adversarial principle in Polish civil process]; P. Marciniak, Zasada kontradyktoryjnoci, p. 100 [Adversarial principle]; W. Broniewicz, Zasada kontradyktoryjnoci, p. 45 [Adversarial prin-ciple]; H.Dolecki, Ciar dowodu wpolskim procesie cywilnym, Warsaw 1998, p.84. [The burden of evidence in Polish civil process]
ZNKUL 60 (2017), nr 3 (239)
Code of Civil Procedure of 17th November 1964 was based on the principle of material truth. As aresult, discovering the truth became the main objective of civil proceedings.
Against this background, acertain substantive dispute arose between W. Siedlecki and J. Jodowski regarding the understanding of adversarial principle. The first Author favored the necessity to ensure co-operation between parties in order to discover the truth and limit the role of court to supportive and eventually complementary functions11. The second Author, on the other hand, criticized all attempts to achieve liberalization of the adversarial principle and denied the correctness of assigning courts with an excessive role in this area12.
Rulings of that period seemed to follow the interpretation of adversarial prin-ciple as proposed by W. Siedlecki. The resolution of Supreme Court of 27th June 1953, CPrez 195/52, contained guidelines for the justice system and indicated that asocia