The Court of Appeal in Warsaw made a decision that shook nearly 200 Amber Gold customers. Friday the court He dismissed their group suit. against the State Treasury, thus completely altering the judgement of the Court of First Instance of 2022, which judged the injured over 20 million PLN compensation. This landmark decision means that the State Treasury will not be held liable for losses suffered by investors cheated by a loud financial pyramid. The judgement of the Court of Appeal sheds fresh light on the state's work in the context of financial scandals and raises broad discussions among lawyers and victims.
Millions of PLN lost: How the Court of Appeal changed the conviction of First Instance
The decision of the Court of Appeal in Warsaw is simply a direct reversal of the earlier decision, which gave hope to hundreds of victims. In 2022, the Warsaw territory Court held that the Treasury was liable for the hold of law enforcement in Amber Gold and ordered the payment of over 20 million PLN compensation to a group of nearly 200 clients. It was then. significant win for victims, indicating the state's negligence in protecting citizens. However, the lawyer General's appeal, representing the Treasury, brought a change. The Court of Appeal found that the judgement at the time was incorrect and did not correspond to the law, which resulted in the dismission of the action in its entirety. The consequence of this decision is the deficiency of State compensation for this peculiar group of customers.
Key reasons: Why is the Treasury not liable for Amber Gold?
In the oral justification of the judgment, justice Catherine Kisiel pointed to fundamental grounds for dismissing the application. The Court of Appeal found that the direct causes of injury on the part of Amber Gold’s customers were due to their ‘swinging decisions on the investment of funds’. This means that the work for the investment hazard taken lies with the investors themselves, not with the State. The Court of First Instance stressed that the evidence submitted in the case did not let the State Treasury, including the individual entities of the prosecutors, to be attributed liability under the civilian Code for harm caused by an unlawful act or omission in the exercise of public authority. There was besides no adequate causal link between the act or omission of the prosecution and the harm suffered by the members of the group in the SA assessment.
The prosecution's late actions: Was that adequate for responsibility?
One of the key points of the dispute was the hold in the prosecution's actions towards Amber Gold. The court of first instance in 2022 argued that "the main problem and the origin of the illegality" was the considerable hold of law enforcement authorities in taking investigative action. However, the Court of Appeal took a different perspective. justice Kisiel pointed out that ‘a different assessment of prosecutorial decisions must not prove the unlawfulness of those decisions, but is simply a average course of action’. It was besides recalled that any decision of the prosecution concerning Amber Gold was challenged by the Financial Supervision Commission (KNF) and subsequently verified by the court. The SA considered that the Court of First Instance was based on the erroneous presumption that the decision to initiate criminal proceedings and to set charges against a associate of the board of directors of a capital company was intended or would origin the company to collapse. This argument is key to knowing the responsibilities of the State In this kind of thing.
Response of victims and further legal steps
The judgement of the Court of Appeal was met with large disappointment by attorneys and victims. Advocate Tomasz Krawczyk, representing Amber Gold's customers, expressed his discontent, stressing that "the argument of the court cannot be accepted". The lawyer pointed out that the judgement was disappointing not only for the reasons and their attorneys, but besides for a large number of people injured by Amber Gold who “looked to it to decide on a possible claim”. Mr Krawczyk stated that 2 issues had been decided about dismissing the case: the court held that the prosecution's conduct (refuting to initiate an investigation and delay) was not illegal, and that there was no causal link between the late prosecution and the injury. The client typical announced that there is inactive a anticipation to lodge a cassation complaint to the ultimate Court, which means that the legal conflict for damages to the victims in the Amber Gold affair may continue.
The decision of the Court of Appeal in the Amber Gold case is an crucial signal for all those observing the Polish legal and financial system. It stresses the complexity of the State's liability for the harm caused by criminal activities and stresses individual investment decisions. Although the judgement is disappointing to many, it opens the way for further legal considerations and a possible cassation complaint, meaning that The last word in this loud scandal hasn't come up yet.. The Amber Gold case, which has focused on politicians, the media and the public years ago, remains a surviving example of consumer protection challenges in the financial market.
Read more:
Amber Gold: Court of Appeal decided. Clients without 20 million from the Treasury
