Month: December 2018

How to avoid the risk of challenging environmental decisions? Marta Banasiak's commentary on this topic can be found on the sozosfera.pl portal

– “Opinions are usually issued at several stages of the ongoing proceedings and each of them is a prerequisite to recognize that a decision closing the process has been properly proceeded. First of all it should be mentioned that applying for a respective approval or opinion to opinion-giving authorities does not fall within responsibilities of an applicant (investor). An authority that conducts the proceedings is in charge of this and it sort of takes place “ex officio”. Nevertheless, an entity interested in obtaining an environmental decision should exercise great care and caution, by constantly verifying whether the authority conducting proceedings is taking appropriate procedural steps.”  

Link to the article: https://sozosfera.pl/prawo/jedna-decyzja-srodowiskowa-kilka-organow/

Wolters Kluwer publishes a book entitled “Orzecznictwo w sprawach podatkowych. Edycja 2018” (Case law in tax matters. 2018 Edition) containing important and controversial judgments that were issued in 2017, of key importance for the practice of applying tax law. The authors attempt to take a critical look at essential judgments issued by the Polish and the EU judiciary. Andrzej Ladziński, esq., is one of the authors of the publication.

Financial penalties are one of main sanctions for non-compliance with environmental requirements. The legislator uses different terminology to determine them, calling them a fine, an administrative pecuniary penalty or an increased fee. Marta Banasiak takes a closer look at fundamental differences between them by elaborating thereon in an article for Sozosfera.pl.

“Considering the maximum possible amount of administrative sanctions and the very addressee of the obligation, a potential analysis of these issues should be carried out when making decisions in the area of ​​commercial transactions in which an enterprise is the subject, since it is impossible to a priori eliminate the risk of such an obligation being passed on to the successor in law.” – says Marta Banasiak.

Link to the article: https://sozosfera.pl/prawo/kary-finansowe-w-ochronie-srodowiska

The Supreme Administrative Court in its judgment of 20 February 2018, in the case with reference number II OSK 1949/17, established that the content of the local zoning plan determines the category of areas, to which plots belong, on which measurements of noise generated by the mine were made. This judgment is commented by a legal counsel from GWW, Dorota Chramęga, on portalsamorządowy.pl: “In other words, the court of appeal emphasized that in the situation covered by the regulation of Article 115a (1) of the Act of 27 April 2001 on Environmental Protection Law (i.e. determination by the environmental protection body, on the basis of its own measurements, measurements made by a voivodeship inspector for environmental protection or measurements of an entity obliged to make them, that permissible noise levels are exceeded outside a plant as a result of its activity), the body deciding on the permissible noise level generated by a given plant is to follow the contents of the local zoning plan”.

A broader commentary on this judgment can be found by clicking the link: https://www.portalsamorzadowy.pl/ochrona-srodowiska/ile-halasu-moze-emitowac-przemysl-nsa-zabral-glos,118511.html

The attorney Joanna Sebzda-Załuska convinces that a decision on what procedure to obtain a building permit should be chosen is of importance not only for investors, but also for buyers of premises.