The percentage of the society interested in vaccination is one of the most important indicators of the civilization development of society. Obviously, the most important test is voter turnout.
For several months in Rzeczpospolita I have been discussing the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the issue of discrimination in employment. At this point, I do not mean the content of the judgments themselves, the court’s thinking about its place and meaning, but I would say simple technological and practical solutions related to these judgments.
On the occasion of changes to the code of administrative procedure, which, inter alia, are to block the implementation of property rights in Poland, a seemingly logical thesis emerged that no system can accept uncertainty in the field of property status for so many years.
I write about the courts without reluctance, but with care and faith. A private lawyer will not be valid unless the courts are valid. Several solutions in this regard seem to be absolutely necessary and obvious here. It is worth talking about it today, when their implementation is impossible. Important things come from open thinking, and it’s never too early to think.
In the previous section of my considerations (which can be called socio-legal), I argued that the legal culture of individual societies should be judged on the basis of the extent to which the law is respected for fear of punishment and responsibility, and to what extent – from the conviction that this law serves benefit all of us. Yes, the way Poles use the left turn signal is perhaps the most frustrating and annoying but, of course, I don’t really mean the left turn signal. Not even the right turn signal. Or how to use a turn signal when changing lanes on the road. Nor also about the way Poles parked in two places. That’s not what I mean at all.
Take a look at your home libraries and think about who you would be if you read all the books you have on the shelves. And yet – as you probably know – there are still many, many more of these books. This somewhat inspiring, somewhat depressing reflection has been with me since childhood. Now I am transferring it to my profession, i.e. to the profession of a lawyer.
I would like to say something smart about the francs, but I am not able to. Especially when Ewa Łętowska and Leszek Balcerowicz faced each other in the dispute, i.e. two people so important that I would not mention few more important for the shape of my social thinking. In general, for all of me as I am. The difference between leftist and liberal thinking is just as irreconcilable as between liberal and conservative thinking.
A long time ago, i.e. shortly before Poland’s accession to the European Union, I was at an event of the international legal network to which I belonged. I remember a certain Finn’s name, Henrik Hastö, being intensely warned about what his EU country entered into for a lawyer. I believed him, nodded my head, but rather without conviction.
In fact, only Linkedin is suitable among social media for lawyers. Facebook can do more harm than help. A professional should answer the question if I would have used another professional if I had found him on Facebook or Instagram, and found out about his four red cats.
Probably many people ask themselves why we obey the law. In any case, we should ask ourselves such a question, the answer to it is the source of important information about us, it determines our place in the social hierarchy of meanings.
Two great European courts, the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg and the Court of Justice of the European Union based in Luxembourg are the last hope for many Europeans, especially for societies and nations injured and exposed to authoritarians from bygone eras in power.
How should society’s attitude to law be examined? In declarations, polls, interviews? No no no. The attitude to the law, or to the regulatory mechanisms of society in general, must be tested in action. That is, in mechanical, repetitive, unintentional acts, in the first system according to the Kahneman and Tversky typology.
We lawyers, we know court law and theoretically we should persuade our clients to go to court when necessary.
Meanwhile, our first, best piece of advice we’ve given our clients for many years is just: don’t go to court. Avoid the court. Seek any other solution, NOT THE COURT.
The key elements of the grant infrastructure are amazingly under-regulated. We advise you to be careful.
The fact that EU subsidies have changed Poland is beyond doubt. The fact that EU subsidies are based on mature legal acts of the Union itself is also beyond doubt. The fact that subsidies sometimes have to be returned – the entrepreneur finds out about it in the most unexpected way. We are taking such an agreement for an EU subsidy. The deal is large.
Technology allows companies to advertise products that are generally not allowed to advertise. The essence of the solution is to create an additional requirement to become familiar with the advertised product.
It is well known that industries producing goods considered harmful – more or less – are plagued by advertising bans. The historically most famous cases of bypassing advertising bans are those that today would certainly be considered outright illegal, such as the “Łódka Bols” or WTK Soplica.
What is the alternativeness of this newsletter?
First of all, what we will not write about, and what they usually write about in newsletters.
First of all – we will not write what has changed in the applicable regulations. There are others who do it constantly, and they certainly do it better than we would. In particular, we will not write about which law enters into force, and especially about the fact that we know the law that enters into force better than anyone else.