Browsing by Author "Nestoruk, Igor B."
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item EUROPEIZACJA PRAWA KARNEGO GOSPODARCZEGO (NA PRZYKŁADZIE NIEMIECKIEJ USTAWY O ZWALCZANIU NIEUCZCIWEJ KONKURENCJI)(Wydział Prawa i Administracji UAM, 2003) Nestoruk, Igor B.The article explores the issue of the remarkable influence of the community-based law on the criminal law of the member states of the EU. There is a significant number of examples illustrating this phenomenon especially in the area of the criminal law against white collar crimes. The consequences of this pending process are deliberately analyzed on the example of criminal acts against unfair market practices. The author has chosen the criminal provisions valid under the German Act against Unfair Competition of 1909 (especially its penal sanctions against misleading advertisement) in order to show the significance of the process of „europeanization” of economic criminal law.Item SPRAWOZDANIA I INFORMACJE. PRAWO ZWALCZANIA NIEUCZCIWEJ KONKURENCJI A ACQUIS COMMUNAUTAIRE SYMPOZJUM NAUKOWE Berlin, 13-14 listopada 2008 r.(Wydział Prawa i Administracji UAM, 2009) Nestoruk, Igor B.Item WNIOSKOWY TRYB ŚCIGANIA PRZESTĘPSTW W POLSKIM1 I NIEMIECKIM2 PRAWIE KARNYM(Wydział Prawa i Administracji UAM, 2001) Nestoruk, Igor B.The aim of the article is to present some selected problems of offences prosecuted on the injured person’s motion against the background of the binding regulations of the Polish and German criminal law. The prevalent pattern followed in the paper is: „case - solution” and the examples provided are all practice-based. The starting point of the discussion is a historical perspective of the motion for prosecution and then the dogmatic grounds of the motion construct in both systems is presented. The following points are investigated in greater detail: firstly, the place of the motion in the broadly understood system of the criminal law (the motion being an instance of departure from the rule of prosecuting ex officio)', secondly, the legal nature of the motion and, thirdly, the legislative principles of applying this mode of prosecuting in both countries. Furthermore, the author extensively discusses the problem of classifying the offences which can be prosecuted following a motion as well as the issue of statutory definitions of such notions as „next of kin” and „injured party”. The legal comparative method allowed to draw upon the broad experience of the German legal studies. The so-called herrschende Meinung, commonly accepted in Germany, provides a number of examples implying the existence of both major similarities and glaring discrepancies when it comes to the treatment of the selected issues of torts prosecuted on a motion.