<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Polish IP &#38; IT law - copyright trademark computer internet telecomm &#187; e-proceedings</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rychlicki.net/en/issue/e-law-issues/e-proceedings/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rychlicki.net/en</link>
	<description>Tomasz Rychlicki Intellectual Property Law Internet Law IT Law Computer Law</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 10:24:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>E-signature law, case II SAB/Łd 35/12</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2012/04/11/7889/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2012/04/11/7889/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2012 09:50:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art. 46 §1 pt 4 PBAC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 58 PBAC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[computer law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-documents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-law issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-proceedings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-signature]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Proceedings Before Administrative Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voivodeship Administrative Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=7889</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Polish citizen filed a complaint to the Voivodeship Administrative Court via e-mail, and signed it with the qualified electronic signature. The Court called him to sign the complaint manually, within 7 days under pain of rejection of the complaint. The applicant argued that he already signed it. The Voivodeship Administrative Court in Łódź in [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2012/04/11/7889/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>E-proceedings, case II FZ 447/11</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2012/02/23/7562/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2012/02/23/7562/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:44:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art. 194 PBAC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 46 §1 pt 4 PBAC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 83 § 1 PBAC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-documents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-law issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-proceedings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-signature]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Proceedings Before Administrative Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Supreme Administrative Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voivodeship Administrative Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=7562</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Voivodeship Administrative Court in Gdańsk in its order of 23 March 2011 case file I SA/Gd 916/10 rejected a complaint against a decision on leaving the applicant&#8217;s request for the relief for the payment of court fees from the complaints, without examination. The complaint was sent by post the day after the deadline, but [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2012/02/23/7562/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>E-signature law, case II SA/Gd 573/10</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/09/11/5377/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/09/11/5377/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Sep 2010 20:49:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art. 46 §1 pt 4 PBAC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 63 APC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-documents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-proceedings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-signature]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Proceedings Before Administrative Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Administrative Proceedings Code]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voivodeship Administrative Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=5377</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Voivodeship Administrative Court in Gdańsk in its order of 9 September 2010 case file II SA/Gd 573/10 held that the legal effectiveness of a letter brought by a party to an administrative court by electronic means must be confirmed by its later signature. This is the requirement provided in Article 46 § 1 pkt [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/09/11/5377/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tax law, case III SA/Wa 396/10</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/04/18/3868/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/04/18/3868/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Apr 2010 11:54:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[case law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-access]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-documents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-invoices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-proceedings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-signature]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Treaty on European Union]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voivodeship Administrative Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=3868</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Voivodeship Administrative Court (VAC) in Warsaw in a judgment of 8 April 2010, case file III SA/Wa 396/10, ruled that there is no legislative impediment to the existence of a mixed system for the storage of invoices, which consists of sending an invoice in paper and storage of its electronic copies with the option [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/04/18/3868/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>E-access to public information, case II SAB/Wa 86/07</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/02/20/2355/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/02/20/2355/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 20:21:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art. 16 API]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-access]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-documents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-proceedings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-signature]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on access to public information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Electronic Signature]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voivodeship Administrative Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=2355</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Voivodeship Administrative Court in Warsaw in its judgment of 10 December 2007 case file II SAB/Wa 86/07 held that the request filed in the electronic form (e-mail), that was not signed with the qualified electronic signature, is a legally sufficient request for disclosure of public information. Furthermore, the request for disclosure of public information [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/02/20/2355/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

