Precedents and case-based reasoning in the case law of the Constitutional Tribunal of the Republic of Poland

Abstract

The Polish Constitutional Court (CC) makes extensive use of its own case law and the case law of other courts in its constitutional adjudication. The predominant argument is ‘from its own authority’, which is sometimes overused and also applied in an unreflective manner. The CC treats its jurisprudence as a set of precedents that are potentially relevant for each case to be decided. It does not refer to previous judgments consistently, although it attaches great importance to developing a well-established line of jurisprudence. The frequency of references to the jurisprudence of other Polish courts is lower and mainly covers the case law of the Supreme Court and Supreme Administrative Court. References to the jurisprudence of foreign constitutional courts, although used in the constitutional reasoning, are of limited practical significance. The CC frequently refers to the case law of the ECtHR and CJEU, often treating their decisions as binding precedents. However, at the time of the constitutional crisis, a decrease in the interest of the CC in developing arguments based on the jurisprudence of foreign and international courts can be observed.