Treść książki

Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
16
MichałWojewoda
5.4.Peculiaritiesofthe‘writforrecognition’asamethod
tochangethelegalsex
UnlikethecorrectionproceedingsenvisagedbytheLawonCivilStatusActs,
therecognitionactionisbased-onthesubstantivelevel-onArt.23and24of
theCiv.C.concerningtheprotectionofpersonalgoods,and-ontheprocedural
level-onArt.189C.C.P.concerningthedetermination(recognition)ofalegal
relationshiporaright.Itissubmittedthatbothlegalbasesareonlymakeshifts
adoptedbytheSCforlackofprovisionsdevoteddirectlytotheproblem.Being
asubstitutesolution,thepathsetoutinthe1991SCrulingiscriticizedforhaving
somedrawbacks.
5.4.1.Firstofall,itshouldbenotedthatthe4writforrecognition’islaunched
inthesocalledcontentiousproceedings.Inthistypeofcivilprocess,theplaintif
(atransperson)isrequiredtonamethedefendantagainstwhomthewritis
addressed.Itisnoteasytoresolve,though,whoshouldbesummonedinthistype
ofcase.TheSCoriginallyheldthattheroleofdefendantsshouldbetakenby
parentsoftheplaintifor-iftheyarebothdead-byaspecialcuratorappointed
bythecourt.Thismaycreateuncomfortablesituationsinthecourtroomsince
parentsoftenfeel4accused’bytheirchildren.Apartfromthat,notwithstanding
anymedicalevidenceconfirmingthepsychologicalsex,parentsdonotalways
sympathizewiththefeelingsoftheplaintifandnotinfrequentlytheywantthe
casetobedismissed.
InoneofitsrecentrulingsofDecember6,2013,26theSCpartlyrefined
itspositionconcerningthedefendantparty.Itwasdecidedthatwheneverthe
plaintifhaschildrenand/orismarried,itisthespouseandchildrenwhoshould
beobligatorilyactingasdefendants.Insuchsituationparentsarenotmandatory
participantsoftheproceedings.WhenarrivingatthisconclusiontheSCput
forwardanimportantargumentthattheconsequencesofthepotentialchangeof
sexgofarbeyondtheindividualinterestoftheplaintif.Theyalsobearheavily
uponthelegalsituationofhis/herchildrenandspouseandthatiswhythese
personsmustparticipateintheproceedings.Thispositionisnotuniversally
accepted,though.InitsjudgmentofDecember15,201727theAppellateCourt
inŁódźrejectedtheviewthatchildrenofagiventranssexualmustparticipate
inthechange-of-sexproceedings.Thepanelofjudgesdecidingtheabovecase
adheredtotheformerconceptthattheplaintifshouldratherindicatehis/her
parentsasdefendants,especiallythatparentsarenamedinthebirthactwhichis
supposedtobeannotatedwiththeinformationaboutthereassignedsex(ifthe
claimissuccessful).
26ICSK146/13.
27IACa531/17.