Abstract
Signalling a gross breach of procedural duty by attorney-at-law in criminal proceedings The purpose of this article is to present the institution of signalling a gross breach of procedural duties by an attorney-at-law who is a defense counsel or an attorney of a party in criminal proceedings. This institution is regulated by the provisions of Article 20 of the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure, while this provision is also applicable in other procedures: proceedings in cases regarding fiscal crimes and fiscal offenses, misdemeanour proceedings and executive criminal proceedings. The analysis of the applicable regulation leads to the conclusion that signalling constitutes an action of the procedural authorities "outside" the pending criminal proceedings. A notification of a breach of a procedural duty addressed by a public prosecutor or a court to the council of the competent district chamber of attorneys-at-law does not in itself hold the alleged offending attorney-at-law liable for professional liability. The decision as to whether any consequences are to be drawn against him or her as a result of the finding of a violation is taken autonomously by the organs of the attorneys-at-law self-government. They are obliged to take action about the prosecutor's or court's signalling, and the dean of the council is obliged to inform the body of the violation of such action.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
