Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10593/26140
Title: Odpowiedzialność kościelnych osób prawnych za czyny pedofilskie duchownego – wyrok na miarę precedensu. Uwagi w sprawie wyroku Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 31 marca 2020 r., sygn. II CSK 124/19
Other Titles: Responsibility of church legal entities for the actions of a pedophile clergyman – a judgment as a precedent. Comments on the judgment of the Supreme Court of March 31, 2020, file ref. no. II CSK 124/19
Authors: Borecki, Paweł
Keywords: pedophilia
the Catholic Church
the Supreme Cour
compensation
the Holy See
Issue Date: 2020
Publisher: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM
Citation: Studia Prawa Publicznego, 2020, Nr 3 (31),pp. 33-52.
Abstract: The judgment of March 31, 2020, file ref. II CSK 124/19, has great social and legal significance. It is the first Supreme Court ruling concerning the civil liability of church legal entities for pedophilic acts committed by a clergyman. The Supreme Court shared the view of the Court of Appeal accepting the liability of church legal persons in the light of all the facts of the case of Art. 430 of the Civil Code (culpability in supervision). However, it convincingly distanced itself from the position of the District Court (court of first instance) that liability under Art. 429 of the Civil Code (culpability in choice) should be taken into consideration. In the justification of the judgment, the Supreme Court conducted a thorough analysis of the premises for the civil liability of church legal persons for the activities of a religious person subordinate to them. In particular, it stated that if the perpetrator acts for personal gain and the performance of the official activity enables him to cause damage, the superior cannot effectively raise the objection that the subordinate caused said damage only in the performance of the entrusted tasks. Thus, the Supreme Court upheld the interpretation of Art. 430 of the Civil Code, assuming the liability of legal persons for damage caused by a subordinate. It distinctly applied this liability to church legal entities. When appointing the adjudication panel of the Supreme Court, impartiality was preserved. On the other hand, doubts are raised regarding the Court’s neutrality in terms of world-view in some parts of its judgment justification. The judgment of March 31, 2020 must be assessed as brave and just. It has the chance to set the course of judicial decisions in matters of the liability of religious legal persons for pedophilic acts committed by clergy acting under their supervision. The justification of the judgment is understandably critical towards the perpetrator and church legal persons superior to him, and also sometimes towards the provisions of the Code of Canon Law. It should be emphasized, however, that the judgment is not an “indictment” against the Catholic Church as such, and even less so against religion.
URI: https://hdl.handle.net/10593/26140
DOI: 10.14746/spp.2020.3.31.2
ISSN: 2300-3936
Appears in Collections:Studia Prawa Publicznego, 2020, Nr 3 (31)

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
SPP 2020(31)3 – Pawel_Borecki.pdf216.51 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show full item record



Items in AMUR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.