W sprawie problemów intertemporalnych związanych z wejściem w życie art. 119 1a Kodeksu rodzinnego i opiekuńczego
Journal Title: Zeszyty Prawnicze Biura Analiz Sejmowych - Year 2016, Vol 50, Issue 2
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to provide an exhaustive analysis of selected intertemporal issues arising in connection with the approval and entry into force of Article 119 [1a] of the Polish Family and Guardianship Code (KRO). In particular, its aim is to answer whether a consent for adoption, as specified in former Article 119 KRO, would remain binding after the entry into force of the amendment. Consequently, whether the court in which the adoption process was started under the former provision, would be bound by a consent expressed on its grounds even after the entry into force of the new Article 119 [1a] KRO. It was es‑ tablished that the consent to the adoption, expressed according to Article 119 KRO, would remain valid under the new (current) state of law. Consequently, it is binding on the court hearing the adoption application, even if the proceedings had not been completed before the entry into force of the Article 119 [1a] KRO. This binding aspect, of course, does not impose on the court an obligation to make an adoption order in favour of an entity (entities) named in the declaration of consent made by parents (on the basis of relevant provisions of KRO, the court may recognize, in particular, that it would be contrary to the interests of the child), however, it excludes an adoption order in favour of others. Firstly, this result appears to be completely unambiguous in the light of linguistic interpretation principles. Secondly, the linguistic result is, again unambiguously, confirmed by the system directives as consistent with principle of non-retroactivity (lex retro non agit) which is not only normatively understood but also descriptively recognized.
Authors and Affiliations
Krzysztof Mularski
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP310009
- DOI -
- Views 57
- Downloads 0
Tryb zwoływania posiedzeń komisji sejmowych
The power of the presidium of the committee to determine the agenda of a committee sitting is limited only in two cases – a minority request to convene a sitting and an initiative of the Presidium of the Sejm. The chairp...
Opinia prawna w sprawie możliwości wprowadzenia regulacji pozwalających na wydzielenie w ramach ryczałtu na funkcjonowanie biura poselskiego określonej części środków z przeznaczeniem na tzw. wydatki reprezentacyjne, przy jednoczesnym wyłączeniu z obowiązku dokumentowania faktu ich poniesienia fakturami VAT lub rachunkami
According to the author, under the existing legal provisions is not advisable to introduce regulations allowing for separation – as part of a lump sum – of funds for the so-called representation expenses. Due to the hete...
Opinia prawna na temat ograniczeń wynikających z Konstytucji RP dotyczących uzawodowienia mandatu poselskiego
The aim of this opinion is to answer the question of how the status of a full-time (also called “a professional”) Deputy to the Sejm (assuming that it is the only form of his/her activity) involves limitations on his/her...
Opinia prawna na temat utraty przez partie polityczne prawa do otrzymywania subwencji z budżetu państwa w myśl art. 38d ustawy z 27 czerwca 1997 r. o partiach politycznych
The opinion emphasizes that the sanction of deprivation of the right to receive subsidies by political parties constitute an ailment resulting from the violation of legal standards concerning financial reporting of a pol...
Opinia prawna w sprawie wykładni art. 175 regulaminu Sejmu – według pytań szczegółowych
The opinion concerns the decision of the Marshal of the Sejm to expel a Deputy from a sitting, taken pursuant to Article. 175 para. 5 of the Standing Orders of the Sejm. In the author’s view, such decision is not final,...