ISTOTA I CHARAKTERYSTYKA PRAWNA ANTYMONOPOLOWYCH KAR PIENIĘŻNYCH
| dc.contributor.author | Sachajko, Marek | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2013-07-18T09:48:55Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2013-07-18T09:48:55Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2002 | |
| dc.description.abstract | To sanction effectively any violation of antitrust obligations, the Polish legislator has created a system of administrative and legal measures comprising administrative sanctions and financial sanctions, regulated in section 6 of the respective act. Cash penalties are administrative and legal sanctions. Although they share a number of common characteristics, they also differ in many major respects, so that the legal nature of these measures is incoherent, despite the fact that they function under one term. Under the Polish Act of 2000 on the Protection of Competition and Consumers one can distinguish three separate types of cash penalties: administrative cash penalty, cash penalty aiming at coercion, and a penalty that is a procedural coercion measure. An administrative cash penalty is imposed for a violation of the sanctioned antitrust legal provisions. The grounds for its imposition are a failure to discharge one’s obligations imposed by the force of a legal act. This penalty is a type of an administrative and penal sanction: an administrative penalty. A cash penalty exerts coercion by coercing the penalised party into a specific action. This penalty bears attributes similar to those o f administrative executive measures. The last group of antitrust cash penalties is included among the measures of procedural coercion, which are a type of the so-called procedural coercive measures. These measures aim at ensuring a proper course of proceedings. Referring in the Act to each of the above mentioned sanctions with the same term of „cash penalty” is an incorrect solution, as it does not eliminate the need to interpret the character of those sanctions at the level of law application. Furthermore, it is incorrect to regulate markedly different penalties in the aggregate in the same part of the Act. The legislator should increase legal certainty in interpreting the competition protection law by introducing different terms for penalties and by separating legal institutions of differing character within the same text unit of a legal act. Such solutions would increase both the legal certainty and the possibility to decode the legal penalty norms more easily. | pl_PL |
| dc.identifier.citation | Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny 64, 2002, z. 1, s. 57-78. | pl_PL |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0035-9629 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10593/7003 | |
| dc.language.iso | pl | pl_PL |
| dc.publisher | Wydział Prawa i Administracji UAM | pl_PL |
| dc.title | ISTOTA I CHARAKTERYSTYKA PRAWNA ANTYMONOPOLOWYCH KAR PIENIĘŻNYCH | pl_PL |
| dc.title.alternative | LEGAL NATURE AND PROFILE OF ANTITRUST CASH PENALTIES | pl_PL |
| dc.type | Artykuł | pl_PL |
Files
Original bundle
1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
- Name:
- 05_Marek_Sachajko_Istota i charakterystyka prawna antymonopolowych_57-78.pdf
- Size:
- 886.74 KB
- Format:
- Adobe Portable Document Format
License bundle
1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
- Name:
- license.txt
- Size:
- 1.49 KB
- Format:
- Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
- Description: