Quarterly


Polish Civil Procedure

Slider
Mlotek Sedziowski 00060

Polski Proces Cywilny [Polish Civil Procedure] is a quarterly for to the academia and for those practically involved in the administration of justice. It discusses issues from the area of civil procedural law, including the questions of conciliatory courts and mediation, as well as insolvency and restructuring proceedings. Its aim is to present opinions on important practical and scholarly issues relating to interpreting, applying, and enacting civil procedural law. The efforts of the Editorial College are also aimed at maintaining a balance between the scholarly and practical aspects in the publications in Polski Proces Cywilny.

ISSN 2082-1743

The journal publishes articles, essays, case law reviews, commentaries, analyses of practical legal issues, detailed reviews of major works published in Poland and selected books published abroad, papers on the proposed normative solutions, and information about events important for those interested in the procedural law in Poland and abroad.
The assumption is that the journal should facilitate discussions, exchanges of views and opinions, presentations of proposed solutions concerning the applicable regulations or as the directions of their possible changes in the future.

Ethical principles

Ethical principles concerning publications in academic journals

Ethical principles concerning publications in academic journals

Wolters Kluwer Polska publishing house, part of Wolters Kluwer international publishing house, which is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), https://publicationethics.org, applies the organization’s standards and recommendations in the publishing process.

 

Ethical principles for authors

We only accept original, previously unpublished manuscripts for publication. Submitting the same manuscripts to more than one journal is considered inappropriate. The author represents that he/she has not expressed and will not express consent for another journal to publish the manuscript. If the aforementioned representation is found not to be true, the editorial board has the right to refuse to publish the manuscript.
Authors can submit for publication only their own original manuscripts. Plagiarism or data fabrication constitute academic misconduct.
Please provide (in notes) information about the sources of funding for a given publication, such as domestic or international grants, subsidies from foundations, associations or commercial institutions. 
In case of co-authorship, please state the percentages which individual authors contributed to the publication.
The author is responsible for the manuscript reflecting the current state of law, quoted provisions of law, case law and literature. If, after manuscript submission, the author finds an error or inaccuracy in it, the author has a duty to promptly notify the editorial board about it.
The author should make references to the publications which had an influence on the submitted manuscript in the form of quotes and in the attached bibliography.
The author warrants that the copyright in the manuscript, which copyright is transferred to the publisher upon the editorial board accepting the manuscript, will not be limited by any third party rights, that the use and disposal of the manuscript by the publisher will not infringe personal interests or rights of third parties.
The manuscripts submitted by the authors are published on the basis of publishing agreements with authors, where all copyright law issues are regulated.
Ghostwriting. In order to counteract cases of ghostwriting or guest authorship, authors have a duty to disclose to the editorial board and notify it about the contributions of individual authors in the creation of the publication (stating their affiliations and contributions, i.e. who is the author of conceptions, assumptions, methods, etc. used in preparing the publication). The main responsibility for that is borne by the author who submits the manuscript. Authors are obligated to provide the editorial board with information about the contributions of scientific research institutions, associations, and other entities. The editorial board informs that ghostwriting and guest authorship are regarded as scientific misconduct. Any detected cases will be exposed, including notifying the relevant entities (institutions employing such authors, academic societies, associations of academic editors, etc.).

Responsibilities of the editorial board

The editorial board documents any cases of academic misconduct, especially violations and infringements of the ethical principles applicable in the academia.
Any decision to publish an article is based on reviews, the opinion of the subject editor and the editorial college. The decision whether or not to publish is also influenced by the risk of copyright violations. 
In the process of making the decision to accept or reject a given academic manuscript, the important factors include originality, academic quality, and compatibility with the journal’s range of topics.
No member of the editorial board can disclose any information about any submitted manuscript to any other person than - in accordance with the editorial procedure - its author, reviewers, potential reviewers or the publisher. 
The editorial board does not disclose reviewers’ data to authors.
Information obtained in the process of publication evaluation, as well as the rejected manuscripts or their fragments, cannot be used in own research of the editorial board members or reviewers without the author’s express written consent.
The editorial board does not appoint as reviewers any persons who report directly to the manuscript authors or who are in any other direct personal or professional relations with them to the extent that might result in conflicts of interests.

Responsibilities of reviewers

Manuscripts are reviewed before publication. For the academic evaluation of each manuscript, the editorial board appoints at least two reviewers from among the members of the academic council, editorial college or other specialists in the field that the manuscript concerns. 
The names of the reviewers of particular manuscripts are not disclosed to authors. The list of reviewers who cooperate with the journal, without naming the reviewer of a specific manuscript, is published on the journal’s website and in its printed version.
A reviewer supports the editor-in-chief in making editorial decisions and may also support the author in improving the manuscript.
Each selected reviewer who is unable to review a manuscript or knows that it is impossible to quickly prepare a review should inform the managing editor about it.
Reviews should be objective. Personal critique of the author is considered improper. Reviewers should express their views clearly, supporting them with appropriate arguments.
All reviewed manuscripts must be treated as confidential documents. They cannot be shown to or discussed about with any other persons than the managing editor, who is authorized.
Confidential information or ideas inspired by the review must be kept secret and cannot be used in order to gain personal benefits. Reviewers should not review manuscripts where there is a conflict of interests resulting from the relationship with the author, company or institution connected with the manuscript.
Reviewers should identify the publications that the manuscript author failed to refer to. A reviewer should also inform the managing editor about any significant similarity, partial overlap of the contents of the manuscript under review with any other published work known to the reviewer or a suspected plagiarism.

Editorial Team

Editorial Committee

Members of the Editorial Committee of Polski Proces Cywilny quarterly include:
dr  Katarzyna Gajda-Roszczynialska more ›
dr hab. Paweł Grzegorczyk more ›
dr hab. Krystian Markiewicz more ›
dr hab. Marcin Walasik more ›
prof. dr hab. Karol Weitz (editor-in-chief) more ›
dr hab. Piotr Rylski (managing editor) more ›

Programme Council

Members of the Programme Council of Polski Proces Cywilny quartely include:

dr hab. Henryk Dolecki
Wyższa Szkoła Administracji Publicznej w Szczecinie
prof. Masahisa Deguchi
Ritsumeikan Kyoto University

prof. dr hab. Tadeusz Ereciński
Uniwersytet Warszawski
dr hab. Agnieszka Góra-Błaszczykowska
SWPS Uniwersytet Humanistycznospołeczny
sędzia SN Jacek Gudowski
Sąd Najwyższy
prof. dr hab. Janusz Jankowski
Uniwersytet  Łódzki
prof. dr hab. Stanisława Kalus
Uniwersytet Śląski
dr hab. Krzysztof Knoppek
Uniwersytet Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
prof. dr hab. Kazimierz Lubiński
Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika w Toruniu
prof. dr hab. Andrzej Marciniak
Uniwersytet  Łódzki
prof. dr hab. Elwira Marszałkowska-Krześ
Uniwersytet Wrocławski
prof. Vytautas Nekrošius
Uniwersytet Wileński
sędzia SN Henryk Pietrzkowski
Sąd Najwyższy
prof. dr hab. Piotr Pogonowski
Wyższa Szkoła Finansów i Zarządzania w Warszawie

Reviewers

The (peer) reviewers of Polski Proces Cywilny quarterly for 2018 included the following persons:

Sławomir Cieślak
Anna Hrycaj
Andrzej Jakubecki
Volodymyr Kossak
Jerzy Pisuliński
Andrzej Torbus
Karol Weitz
Tadeusz Wiśniewski
Feliks Zedler

Contact Us

For more information on the journal contact the Editorial Board

For more information on the journal contact the Editorial Board

envelope

Wolters Kluwer Polska Sp. z o.o.
ul. Przyokopowa 33
01-208 Warszawa

e-mail: Ten adres pocztowy jest chroniony przed spamowaniem. Aby go zobaczyć, konieczne jest włączenie w przeglądarce obsługi JavaScript.

 

Please publish modules in offcanvas position.