Source: https://www.kancelaria-rzeszow.com/?lang=en
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 22:14:57+00:00

Document:
Here you will find information about significant changes in the law, how to interpret the rules, what we are working on and how we realize our projects and what the final results are.
Recently the Law Firm accepted a request related to settlement of construction works completed by our Client, a limited company operating in power, oil and gas industries; the value of the works totals at a few million Polish zloty.
Lawyers of the Law Firm have initiated a procedure to recover remuneration, claimed from the investor under joint and several liability.
Regulation of the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy dated 28 May 1996 on management of records related to employment relationship and on the way employees' personal files are kept by employers, became invalid on 1 January 2019. It was replaced with the Regulation of the Minister of Family, Labour and Social Policy, dated 10 December 2018 on employee records.
The basic change introduced by the new regulation involves reorganisation of the way personal files are managed. In accordance with the new legal provisions, the files are divided into four sections, compared to three existing in the previous system. In addition to “Part A”, related to the stage of application and recruitment, “Part B” related to employment contract and the course of employment, as well as “Part C” related to termination of employment relationship, the newly defined “Part D” is designed to comprise documents related to penalties imposed. Each part may be divided into smaller sections, to hold documents related to one subject matter, however the files still must be kept in chronological order.
The regulation also defines “employee records” other than personal files, to contain inter alia documents containing labour time records, documents related to requests for and use of vacation time, remuneration sheets, as well as documents related to work clothes and shoes. In accordance with the new regulation an employer may choose to keep employee records on paper or in an electronic format. An employee may decide to keep the records in an electronic format at any time, immediately after the amended regulation comes in force, or even after a few years. Importantly, this format may also be used to keep personal files of former employees, where the employer is still required to store such files. The regulation also elucidates any doubts with regard to employers' duty to store the originals of employee records. If personal files are kept on paper, an employee may store copies or duplicates, certified as true copies of the original. In the case the records are stored in electronic form, and a paper document is to be added, it is necessary to scan the document, provide it with a qualified electronic signature, and store it in an appropriate IT system.
In line with the new regulations, once an employment relationship is terminated, the employer is not only required to issue an employment record for the employee, but also to provide information about the period of time during which the person's documents shall be stored and about a possibility to take back the documents by the end of the calendar month following the end of the above period. This information may be issued on paper or in an electronic form.
Amended regulations related to perpetual usufruct came in force on 01.01.2019. On this date, by law, perpetual usufruct shall be transformed into the right of ownership, in the cases defined by the act. Although city authorities declare they are ready to proceed with enfranchisement, the process of transformation may be hindered due to the fact that the legal regulations are hard to interpret and because the legal status of numerous properties is unclear. Furthermore, in line with the transformation rules, the change is not applicable to all plots of land, including sidewalks, internal roads within housing estates or playgrounds. Many people may also be disappointed by the fact that the process of instituting perpetual usufruct may be rather costly. In order to streamline the process of issuing certificates related to title transfer, an amendment was introduced whereby such certificates are to be issued in a shorter time than previously. Notaries, however, explain that the shorter deadline is only defined as an instruction; faced with a large number of applications, relevant offices in large cities will not be able to issue them in a timely manner.
CAN A CONSORTIUM LEADER BE CHANGED DURING THE PROCUREMENT PROCEDURE?
A change of a consortium leader does not carry any legal consequences, if the composition of the consortium is unchanged compared to that during the stage when the relevant proposal is submitted. Such opinion was presented by the National Appeals Chamber in its decision dated 9 July 2018 issued in the case, reg. no. KIO 1232/18. In the justification to the decision, the Chamber pointed out that consortium agreements are executed based on the freedom of contract, and under such agreements consortium members undertake to cooperate, i.e. perform activities stipulated in that agreement, in order to achieve a jointly defined economic purpose. Furthermore, entities jointly seeking an award of contract are required to appoint a proxy to represent them in the procedure, or to represent them in the procedure and conclude a contract related to the relevant public procurement process, therefore the awarding party's operations carried out with respect to the proxy are effectively executed with respect to all the entities jointly seeking the award of the contract. Given the above, if an appeal is lodged by a consortium of entities which jointly submitted a proposal, and the power of attorney was properly granted to the consortium leader, it must be recognised that the appeal was filed by an entity rightfully entitled to do so, irrespective of the fact that the entity authorised to represent the consortium was changed.
In its decision dated 5 July 2017, issued in the case reg. no. II PK 201/16, the Supreme Court presented an opinion that an employee may assert, in course of various proceedings based on the same actual facts, protection of his/her rights, claimed due to violation of personality rights or mobbing faced by him/her.
By reference to the provisions contained in Art. 943 § 3 of the Act dated 26 June 1974 on Labour Code (i.e. Journal of Laws from 2018, item 917, as amended) and Art. 448 of the Civil Code, in connection to Art. 24 § 1 of the Act dated 23 April 1964 on the Civil Code (i.e. Journal of Laws from 2018, item 1025, as amended), the Supreme Court emphasised that the legal constructs and grounds for protection granted based on the relevant regulations are different, as a result of which remedy due under each of these legal institutions may differ in terms of amount, because different premises are taken into account in defining such remedy.
At the same time the Court pointed out that in the process of awarding an adequate amount of remedy claimed under personality rights, the relevant court should take into account compensation awarded earlier, in order to avoid double remedy for the same grievance and to assign additional remedy due to mobbing.
The Law Firm M. Wojciechowska i Wspólnicy Kancelaria Prawnicza Sp. k. in Rzeszów successfully conducted negotiations aiming for amicable resolution of a long-time dispute related to remuneration for subcontractors responsible for construction works in a project carried out for power industry. The negotiations mediated by lawyers of the Law Firm allowed to settle the dispute in a way which was satisfying for the Clients, whereby they received an amount of approximately 17,000,000 PLN. The agreement allowed to end a number of court litigations conducted by a team of lawyers specialising in investment and construction laws, and supervised by attorney-at-law Małgorzata Wojciechowska.
With its decision dated 11 December 2018, the Regional Court in Rzeszów dismissed the claim filed against a Client of the Law Firm, to revoke the right of execute an order, whereby it accepted all the arguments presented by the attorneys-at-law and legal counsels of our Law Firm. In the relevant case the enforcement order was based on the court settlement dated 2014, whereby a municipality was obliged to transfer title of property ownership to a company represented by the Law Firm, for an amount of about 1 million PLN, as stipulated in the court settlement. The settlement was reached in order to rectify the ownership status in the property, due to the fact that plot limits were exceeded in course of a construction project implementation.
The court of the first instance accepted in full the argument stating that the relevant case involved civil law claims under Art. 231 of the Civil Code, therefore the specific regulations of Property Management Act on sale of property owned by territorial units were not directly applicable.
The adjudication is not legally binding; the Law Firm is waiting for its justification in writing.
With its adjudication dated 29 November 2018 the Court of Appeals in Rzeszów accepted in full the opinion presented by attorney-at-law Małgorzata Wojciechowska, who argued in the court of the second instance that a municipality which concluded with an investor a contract for construction of a road, based on Art. 16 of the act on public roads, is not entitled to demand reimbursement of damages amounting to approx. 800,000 PLN which the municipality paid to a bank due to extinction of mortgages encumbering ownership rights, in the properties acquired for public roads, even though in the contract the investor “in advance” waived his right to damages for his ownership rights being revoked in connection with the construction of a public road, based on ZRID.
This decision is of great significance for all developers, who acting in good faith, concluded agreements with public entities and local governments, and signed declarations where they waived their right to damages for transferred properties which earlier were owned by them.
The above decision is legally binding. The Law Firm is waiting for its justification in writing. More details of the justification will be presented in the news later.
The range of legal services, which the law office offers is the result of many years of experience gained by our lawyers in their daily work with clients during the implementation of small and big projects, in court proceedings, in the course of discussions and negotiations. These experiences, knowledge and worked out standards allow us to treat each case on an individual basis and provide clients with the best and most optimal solutions.
There is a possibility to make an appointment on Saturday, after prior arrangement with our office.

References: Art. 943
 § 3
 Art. 448
 Art. 24
 § 1
 Art. 231
 Art. 16