Glosa do wyroku Sądu Najwyższego z 29 sierpnia 2012 r., sygn. akt V KK 419/111 (oszustwo sądowe/procesowe - złożenie zapewnienia spadkowego o nieprawdziwej treści)
Commentary on the Supreme Court's judgment of August 29, 2012, case No. V KK 419/111 (judicial/procedural fraud - submission of a false inheritance declaration)

Summary/Abstract: The ruling in question concerns a specific type of fraud, namely judicial (procedural) fraud. In its judgment of August 29, 2012, the Supreme Court correctly stated that: "The submission by an heir of a false declaration of inheritance may lead to the unjustified exclusion from the circle of heirs of other persons entitled to the estate. Consequently, the order confirming the acquisition of the inheritance is inconsistent with reality and incorrectly identifies the circle of heirs. The issuance of a decision confirming the acquisition of an inheritance, obtained as a result of knowingly misleading the court regarding - contrary to reality - the title to inheritance or the circle of eligible heirs, insofar as it leads to a deterioration in the financial situation of the aggrieved party constitutes an offense under Article 286 § 1 of the Criminal Code". Furthermore, it stated that: "The declaratory nature of the ruling in the civil law sense is irrelevant here, since its issuance produces concrete effects on the financial situation of those entitled to inherit". These arguments must be considered valid. It should be noted, however, that despite the Supreme Court's ruling issued more than a decade ago, the issues surrounding it continue to raise various doubts. The purpose of this commentary is to provide an in-depth analysis of the theses and arguments presented by the Supreme Court in its ruling and, to some extent, to summarize the various divergent views held on this issue to date. It is necessary to answer questions such as: should the concept of judicial fraud be limited exclusively to cases involving the issuance of a constitutive ruling (involving a disposition of property); does an untrue decision confirming the acquisition of an inheritance fulfill the elements of judicial fraud; or should it possibly be punished as the crime of certifying a falsehood by a misled authority; can the state authority - the court - also be the person referred to in Article 286 § 1 of the Criminal Code (whom the perpetrator causes to dispose of property to their disadvantage) can also be a state authority - a court; whether the element of "disposal of property" in Article 286 § 1 of the Criminal Code should be understood broadly or narrowly; whether the type of legal acts or the nature of the court's ruling should preclude the possibility of committing, in certain cases, the crime of judicial fraud in connection with inheritance proceedings. It must be concluded that both the reasoning of the ruling and the manner in which the legal issue was resolved must be considered accurate. It can therefore be assumed that this is an approving commentary.

• Details
• Contents