already in force | In Principle

When is it necessary to hold a shareholders’ meeting, and when can it be dispensed with? Comments under the amended provisions of the Commercial Companies Code

For many companies in Poland, the 30th of June is the date set for holding their ordinary (annual) shareholders’ meeting. One of the points on the agenda should be adoption of a resolution on division of profit (or coverage of loss). The profit shown in the annual financial statement may be earmarked, among other things, to payment of a dividend to the shareholders. It seems like an opportune moment to examine the recent amendment of the regulations governing dividends in limited-liability companies.

For many years, drug distribution has been a strictly regulated business. Entities participating in the trade are licensed, the direction of permitted sales is strictly defined, and the market is subject to control by the Pharmaceutical Inspectorate. Nevertheless, the phenomenon of the “reverse drug distribution chain” still exists. Does the “anti-export” amendment of the Pharmaceutical Law have a chance of eliminating irregularities without paralysing legal trade?

On 6 June 2019, another amendment to the Pharmaceutical Law came into force. Its aim is to reduce the occurrence of non-availability of medicines. According to the authors of the changes, only more severe penalties and broader penalisation can limit the undesirable occurrence of the reverse distribution chain. However, the first comments on these changes show that the threat of penalties alone may not be enough to achieve this goal. It has been known for some time now that the inevitability of punishment is an indicator of the effectiveness of criminal policy.

An amendment to the Industrial Property Law took effect on 16 March 2019, transposing into Polish law the Trademark Directive (2015/2436). The amendment is not revolutionary but will certainly have huge practical implications.

One of the changes in the amendment of the Industrial Property Law is that there will no longer be a graphical presentation requirement for trademarks. From 16 March 2019, it is possible for trademarks to be presented in any form using generally available technology, provided that they are presented in a clear, precise, independent, understandable, durable, objective, and easily accessible manner.

An amendment to the Industrial Property Law has led to changes regarding particular types of trademarks such as collective marks and guarantee marks. Collective marks were included in the previous version of the act, but the guarantee mark is something new, replacing the collective guarantee mark. This will have certain implications for businesses.

A licensee’s right to bring a legal action in proceedings for infringement of a trademark was introduced by the amendment to the Industrial Property Law. So far, in the case of national trademarks, only an exclusive licensee entered in the register could pursue claims for trademark infringement on an equal footing with the proprietor. This has changed from 16 March 2019.

Can a trademark owner require the publisher of a dictionary to indicate alongside the colloquial definition of a word that the word is a registered trademark?

The amendment to the Industrial Property Law in force since 16 March 2019 provides that a person whose services were used in an infringement is also liable for infringement of the protected right to a trademark. A trademark owner may demand that such a person refrain from infringing the trademark, turn over unjustly obtained benefits and repair the damage (where the infringement is culpable). Thus the new regulations introduce the intermediary’s own liability for trademark infringement.

The amendment to the Industrial Property Law extended the rights of trademark proprietors. From 16 March 2019, on the basis of domestic regulations, they may prevent transit of counterfeit goods.

As of 1 January 2019, amendments to the Labour Code came into force allowing employee files to be kept in electronic form. This raises the obvious question of whether employment contracts can be in electronic form as well.