Glosa do wyroku Trybunału Konstytucyjnego z 22 listopada 2016 r., K 13/15

Journal Title: Radca Prawny. Zeszyty naukowe - Year 2018, Vol 16, Issue 3

Abstract

This article pertains to the judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal, in which the Tribunal – acting upon application of the Polish Ombudsman – adjudicated that Article 12(1)–(2) of the Family and Guardianship Code (FGC) is consistent with Article 2, Article 30, and Article 47 in conjunction with Article 31(3) of the Constitution. The author argues that the position taken by the Tribunal should be viewed critically. Although the Tribunal correctly contended that the challenged provision is consistent with the principle of specificity of law derived from Article 2 with Article 30 of the Constitution (on human dignity), it is not possible to share its view that the limitation on the right to enter into a marriage provided for under Article 12 of the FGC meets the requirement of proportionality stemming from Article 31(3) of the Constitution. According to the author, the provision challenged does not satisfy the requirements of utility, relevance, or proportionality sensu stricto in limiting the right to marry that emanates from the right to decide about one’s personal life set forth in Article 47 of the Constitution. Moreover, the Tribunal should approach with greater understanding the current standards concerning prerequisites for marriage arising under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Finally, it also bears mentioning that the challenged provision of the FGC is inconsistent with Article 32(2) of the Constitution, which lays down the prohibition of discrimination. Even though this matter has not been the subject of the Tribunal’s review, it is of fundamental importance while assessing the constitutionality of Article 12 of the FGC. As a result, the provision should be declared unconstitutional, i.e. inconsistent with Article 32(2) and Article 47 in conjunction with Article 31(3) of the Constitution.

Authors and Affiliations

Michał Czubala

Keywords

Related Articles

Rola zagranicznego dokumentu urzędowego w sprawach o potwierdzenie posiadania obywatelstwa polskiego

This publication discusses one of the types of administrative proceedings conducted on the basis of the provisions of the Act of April 2, 2009 on Polish citizenship, i.e. cases concerning confirmation of Polish citizensh...

Skarga na rzecznika dyscyplinarnego, a jego wyłączenie

This article presents the issues of lodging complaints against legal advisers, excluding Disciplinary Ombudsmen and the exclusion proceedings themselves, as well as the practice adopted by the Chief Disciplinary Ombudsma...

Tajemnica zawodowa radcy prawnego w świetle przepisów o kontroli przestrzegania przepisów o ochronie danych osobowych

The President of the Personal Data Protection Office and the subordinates under the provisions of the General Data Protection Regulation and the Personal Data Protection Act have the right to audit law firms in the prese...

Glosa do wyroku Sądu Najwyższego z 30 września 2016 r. (I CSK 595/15)

This article contains comments to the decision issued by the Polish Supreme Court on September 30, 2016, in which the Court presented its position on the scope of protection provided for a endorsee of a blank promissor...

Obowiązek lojalności członków organów spółki kapitałowej

The law, for its proper exercise of regulatory functions, should be a source of values recognized in society. Its strength does not lie in the casuistry of formal orders and restrictions, but in the interpretation of its...

Download PDF file
  • EP ID EP595371
  • DOI -
  • Views 98
  • Downloads 0

How To Cite

Michał Czubala (2018). Glosa do wyroku Trybunału Konstytucyjnego z 22 listopada 2016 r., K 13/15. Radca Prawny. Zeszyty naukowe, 16(3), 169-194. https://europub.co.uk/articles/-A-595371