Skip to content

Acta Iuris Stetinensis

Acta Iuris Stetinensis

Previously: Zeszyty Naukowe. Roczniki Prawnicze

3/2019 (27)
OpenAlex

For the whole journal, according to OpenAlex.

Citations
260
Publications
752
H-index
4
I10-index
2
Mean citedness (2 years)
0.04
Citations received by year
Journal citation chart. Exact values are available in the table below. 2017: 12 2018: 12 2019: 6 2020: 13 2021: 26 2022: 27 2023: 35 2024: 23 2025: 50 2026: 33 2017 2026
Show data table
Citations received by year
YearPublicationsCitations
20175412
20184712
2019546
20203713
20217626
20228727
20236735
20248523
20255850
20264533

Data retrieved:

What do these numbers mean?

Publications and citations cover records linked to this journal in OpenAlex. H-index is the largest number h of publications with at least h citations each. I10-index counts publications cited at least 10 times. The chart shows citations received in each year; the current year is incomplete. Coverage may differ from WNUS and other services.

The 2-year mean is an OpenAlex metric. It is not the Clarivate Journal Impact Factor.

View in OpenAlex (new tab)
Google Scholar

Commentary to the Supreme Court resolution of 20 september 2018, I KZP 5/18

DOI: 10.18276/ais.2019.27-24
Cite

The full text is available

Translation (EN)

Original publication: Glosa do uchwały Sądu Najwyższego z 20 września 2018 roku, I KZP 5/18 (PL)

DOI: 10.18276/ais.2019.27-12

Abstract

The Supreme Court, in the ruling which is subject to this commentary, addresses the notion of an employee referred to in Article 218 § 1a of the Criminal Code. The court discussed the issue of the designation and limits of the notion of “employee” and the subject-matter of protection of the provision referred to above along with its scope. The commentator – in this context – analyses the Supreme Court’s thinking. The commentary’s author agrees in most part with the belief that “the scope of Article 218 § 1a CrC covers only persons who are employees within the meaning of Article 2 LC and Article 22 § 1 and § 11 LC”, though he deems it incomplete as one also needs to take into account Article 8(2a) of the act on social insurance, where – with regard to social insurance – the notion of an employee is slightly broader than the one included in the provisions of the Labour Code. The commentator believes it legitimate that the subject-matter of protection of Article 218 § 1a CrC includes all employee rights resulting from an employment or social insurance relationship. The commentator shares the de lege ferenda postulate for the “protection under Article 218 § 1a CrC to include also persons in employment relationships other that a contract of employment” and, which the Court did not address in the discussed resolution, the civil law relationship referred to in Article 8(2a) of the Social Insurance Act.
Preview PDF

Open PDF

Bibliography (19)
  1. Budyn-Kulik, M., in: Mozgawa, M. (ed.), Kodeks karny. Komentarz (System Informacji Prawnej LEX, 2018), https://sip.lex.pl/#/commentary/587737074/578912, accessed on: 1.04.2019.
  2. Chobot, A., Nowe formy zatrudnienia. Kierunki rozwoju i nowelizacji, Warszawa 1997.
  3. Daniluk, P., Witoszko, W., Glosa do uchwały SN z dnia 15 grudnia 2005, I KZP 34/05, “Orzecznictwo Sądów Polskich” 2006, No. 7–8, item 93, https://sip.lex.pl/#/publication/385929524, accessed on: 27.03.2019.
  4. Konarska-Wrzosek, V., et al., in: Konarska-Wrzosek, V. (ed.), Kodeks karny. Komentarz, 2nd edition, Warszawa 2018, https://sip.lex.pl/#/commentary/587715878/571138, accessed on: 26.03.2019.
  5. Kowalski, S., Ochrona praw pracownika w kodeksie karnym. Zagadnienia teoretyczne i praktyczne. Toruń 2014.
  6. Radecki, W., Przestępstwa przeciwko prawom osób wykonujących pracę zarobkową. Rozdział XXVIII Kodeksu karnego. Komentarz. Warszawa 2001.
  7. Siwik, Z., in: Filar, M. (ed.), Kodeks karny. Komentarz, 5th edition. Warszawa 2016, https://sip.lex.pl/#/commentary/587611208/503460, accessed on: 28.03.2019.
  8. Samol, S., Prawnokarna ochrona praw pracownika w nowym kodeksie karnym, “Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny” 1998, No. 3–4.
  9. Unterschütz, J., Karnoprawna ochrona praw osób wykonujących pracę zarobkową. Warszawa 2010.
  10. Wiatrowski, P., Dyrektywy systemowy interpretacyjnej wykładni przepisów prawa karnego w orzecznictwie Sądu Najwyższego, “Czasopismo Prawa Karnego i Nauk Penalnych” 2009, No. 2.
  11. Wróbel, A., Glosa do postanowienia SN z dnia 13 kwietnia 2005, III KK 23/05, “Studia Iuridica Toruniensia” 2013, No. 1. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/SIT.2013.013, accessed on: 28.03.2019.
  12. Wróbel, A., Odpowiedzialność karna za niedopełnienie obowiązków z zakresu bezpieczeństwa i higieny pracy, “Państwo i Prawo” 2012, No. 12.
  13. Act of 26 June 1974, The Labour Code, Dz. U. (Journal of Laws) of 2018, item 917, consolidated text as amended.
  14. Act of 23 May on trade unions, Dz. U. (Journal of Laws) of 2019, item 263, consolidated text.
  15. Act of 6 June 1997 The Criminal Code, Dz. U. (Journal of Laws) of 2018, item 1600, consolidated text as amended.
  16. Act of 13 October 1998 on the social insurance system, Dz. U. (Journal of Laws) of 2019, item 300, consolidated text as amended.
  17. Judgment of the Administrative Court in Białystok of 24 September 2013, III AUa 304/13, LEX No. 1369209.
  18. Order of the Administrative Court in Katowice of 15 March 2017, II AKz 138/17, LEX No. 2333415.
  19. Resolution of the Supreme Court of 15 December 2005, I KZP 34/05, LEX No. 164200.