Czasopisma logo

Monitor Prawniczy

About the journal

The journal features scientific articles in the field of civil law and civil procedure, companies law, bankruptcy and reorganization law, competition law, industrial property law, copyright law, criminal law and criminal procedure, as well as the community law.

Each issue is divided into transparent sections: News, Opinions, Case Law, Legal Issues in the Supreme Court Practice, Gloss, Practice.Several times a year also extensive special monographic supplements are published.One of the distinctive features of “Monitor Prawniczy” is careful and thorough editing work (big emphasis is placed on efficient and transparent collaboration of the editorial board with the authors), as well as the clear and easy to navigate graphic layout.

The journal has been published since 1993, initially as a monthly, and from 2001 to 2023 as a biweekly, and from 2023 again as a monthly. Until December 2023, over 600 issues of the magazine have been brought out. (ISSN 1230-6509)

Ethical code

The editorial team of “Monitor Prawniczy” exercises the highest degree of care to ensure that ethical standards are kept in scientific publications and adopts all possible measures to prevent negligence of those standards in the periodical. Articles submitted for publication are evaluated from the viewpoint of reliability, ethical standards as well as usefulness for the theory and practice of application of law.

Ethical standards have been based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

http://publicationethics.org/

Download complete set of flowcharts: English (filetype *.PDF)

Duties of editors
  1. The editor-in-chief is obliged to abide by the current state of law with respect to defamation, violation of copyright and plagiarism, and is responsible for decicions concerning selection of articles for publication.
  2. No member of the editorial team (editors, members of the editorial board, members of the board of reviewers) may disclose information on any work submitted to any persons other than the persons eligible to receive it under the publishing procedure adopted by the editorial team.
  3. Unpublished articles of fragments thereof may not be used in own research of the editorial team or reviews without explicit writing consent of the author.
  4. With respect to counteracting discrimination the applicable laws are observed.
Duties of authors
  1. Authorship should be limited to people who significantly contributed to the concept, project, execution or interpretation of a work. All people who made a contribution to a paper should be mentioned as co-authors. The author should make sure that all co-authors have been acknowledged, have seen and accepted the final version of the paper and have agreed for submitting it for publication. In the case of other persons who have had an impact on important aspects of a scientific article, they should be mentioned or presented as contributors.
  2. Authors should disclose all sources of financing in their work, any possible contribution of research institutions, associations and other organizations as well as other major conflicts of interests.
  3. Authors should not publish materials describing the same research project in more than one periodical or original publication. Submitting the same work to more than one periodical is at the same time unethical and prohibited.
  4. Authors are obliged to cite the publications which have had an impact on the submitted work and each time should confirm that works of other authors have been used. They should also make sure that the names of authors quoted in the work and/or fragments of cited works have been correctly cited or mentioned.
  5. If a basic error or discrepancy is found in the work the author should promptly notify the editorial board thereof.
  6. Authors should submit only original works for publication.
  7. Ghostwriting/guest authorship are manifestations of scientific dishonesty and all disclosed cases will be denounced, including notification of relevant authorities. All manifestations of scientific dishonesty, in particular violations and infringements of the ethical standards applicable in research activities will be documented by the editors.
Duties of reviewers
  1. Reviewers provide support to the editor-in-chief in making editorial decisions and – through the editorial team – may also assist authors in making corrections in their works.
  2. Each selected reviewer who cannot review a work or knows that prompt reviewing is impossible should notify the editorial team thereof.
  3. Reviews should be performed objectively. Reviewers should state their views clearly, substantiating them with relevant arguments. Making personal critical remarks about authors is considered inappropriate.
  4. All reviewed works must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with persons other than the duly authorized representative of the editorial team.
  5. All reviews are performed anonymously and author’s data shall not be disclosed to reviewers.
  6. Confidential information or ideas arising as a result of a review should be kept secret and must not be used for gaining personal benefits.
  7. Reviewers should not review works in relation to which there is a conflict of interests arising out of a relationship with relevant authors, companies or institutions.
  8. Reviewers should report any major similarity, partial overlapping of the contents of the work with any other publication they are familiar with, or any suspicion of plagiarism.
Editorial board
  • r. pr. Marcin Dietrich,
  • adw. Jakub Jacyna,
  • adw. Bartłomiej Jankowski,
  • adw. Andrzej Tomaszek. 
Program board
  • prof. Alexander J. Belohlavek,
  • prof. Ludwik Florek,
  • prof. dr hab. Hanna Gronkiewicz-Waltz,
  • prof. Edward Gniewek,
  • prof. Roman Hauser,
  • mec. Andrzej Kalwas,
  • prof. Robert Kulski,
  • prof. Bartosz Makowicz,
  • prof. Krzysztof Pietrzykowski,
  • prof. Grzegorz Sibiga,
  • prof. Andrzej Szajkowski,
  • prof. Janusz Szwaja,
  • prof. Marek Wąsowicz,
  • prof. Robert Zawłocki
Review board
  • SSA Stanisław Gurgul (sędzia Sądu Apelacyjnego w Poznaniu w stanie spoczynku)
  • r.pr. Marcin Dietrich (OIRP Warszawa)
  • adw. Bartłomiej Jankowski (ORA Warszawa)
  • prof. Jerzy P. Naworski (Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika w Toruniu)
  • prof. Janusz A. Strzępka (Uniwersytet Śląski)
  • prof. Konrad Osajda (Uniwersytet Warszawski) prof. Grzegorz Sibiga (Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN)
  • prof. Małgorzata Sieradzka (Uczelnia Łazarskiego)
  • prof. Dariusz Szostek Uniwersytet Opolski
  • adw. Andrzej Tomaszek (ORA Warszawa Polska)
  • prof. Robert Zawłocki (Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu)
  • prof. Robert Kulski (Uniwersytet Łódzki)
  • prof. Krzysztof Pietrzykowski (Uniwersytet Warszawski)
  • adw. Jakub Jacyna (ORA Warszawa)
  • Xawery Konarski (Kancelaria Traple, Konarski, Podrecki i Wspólnicy)
  • rz.p. r.pr. dr Arkadiusz Michalak (Polska Izba Rzeczników Patentowych)