Studia Prawa Prywatnego

StudiaPrawaPrywatnego (Studies in Private Law) is an academic quarterly, published since 2006. It is one of the most renowned journals on Polish private law, hosting contributions from top academics from Poland and abroad. Moreover, Studies in Private Law is one of only two private law journals in Poland that publish long substantial articles intended to address fundamental theoretic problems of private law. Up to now, the Journal has published 71 issues.

The idea of the Journal was created by Professor Zbigniew Radwański, one of the most momentous scholars in Polish private law, distinguished both as an academic and as one of the founding persons of modern private law scholarship in Poland. Since 2006 he has been the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal. After he passed away, he was followed by the new Editor-in-Chief: Professor Bogudar Kordasiewicz – one of the leading Polish private law scholars, with broad expertise in contract and inheritance law.

The Editorial Board of the Journal, as well as its Advisory Board, comprisesa group of eminent private law scholars from Poland and from abroad. It includes scholars from the leading European academic intuitions, such as the European University Institute, the Humboldt University of Berlin and the University of Hamburg. The academics involved in editing the Journal have substantial experience in theoretical research over private law. Some of them combine it with activity in the principal judicial bodies in Poland and abroad (such as the Polish Supreme Court and the Italian Council of State).

The Journal originated alongside the prestigious multi-volume publishing enterprise in Polish private law: "System PrawaPrywatnego" ("System of Private Law"), published in cooperation with the Institute of Law Studies at the Polish Academy of Sciences. Since its establishment,the Journal has featured the core streams of private law theory in Poland. In doing so, it aimed to provide a lively and open forum for the exchange of ideas and for carrying out academic debate. It intended thereby to contribute to the existing body of private law scholarship,and to the further refinement and developmentof the conceptual framework of Polish private law.

The contributions presented in the Journal covera broad scope of private law topics, with particular regard to: contract law, property law, family law, intellectual property, competition law, company law, securities law, international private law and the private law aspects of medical law. Each of the articles is subjected to a double-blind peer review procedure.

Since its establishment, the Journal has hosted several essential pieces that provided milestones of the modern private law scholarship in Poland (e.g. on the interpretation of private law, the transformation of the concept of defects of consent and the current approach towards the typology of contracts).Because of its unique character and goals, the Journal has also provided one of the most important platforms for the discussion over the future legislative reform in Polish private law, with particular regard to the creation of a new Civil Code.

The Journal plays an important role as a platform for discourse between private law scholarship in Poland and abroad. Each of its issues features at least one text in English, which in most instances is authored by a scholar from abroad, or provides more detailed insight into selected problems of Polish private law. The Journal also supports transnational academic initiatives that aim to integrate private law discourse in various European and non-European countries. For instance, in June 2018 the Journal was one of the partners of the international conference "European Contract Law and the Creation of Norms", organised in Warsaw by the European Society of European Contract Law (SECOLA) and the Institute of Law Studies of the Polish Academy of Sciences.

Double blind review process

1. A recommendation (review) by a scientific supervisor should be attached to each article sent to the Publisher by graduates of law faculties, doctoral candidates, assistant professors, trainee legal advisers and trainee attorneys.
2. Articles are subject to anonymisation. Upon being anonymised each article is sent to two independent reviewers. Neither the authors nor the reviewers know the others’ identity.
3. The Publisher applies COPE procedures in the process of evaluating the paper (full information is available on the Publisher’s website and at: https://www.beck.pl/zasady-publikacji/zasady-etyki-publikacyjnej/
4. A list of reviewers cooperating with the Publisher is available on the journal’s website. If necessary, the Publisher may refer to a person from the list.
5. In justified cases, the Publisher may ask a person not on the list for their review.
6. Each review ends with a clear and uniform conclusion regarding the paper’s admission for publication or its rejection, or containing correction suggestions for the author.
7. The author receives anonymised reviews and is requested to make the appropriate amendments suggested in the reviews.

Procedural standards of qualifying scientific papers for publication

1. Only papers that are related to the journal’s subject and profile will be accepted for publication.
2. Only papers that have not previously been published will be accepted for publication, unless they have been significantly changed as compared with the originally published version. Upon submitting the paper, the author will attach a declaration that it has not been plagiarised, does not contain copied elements and does not refer to fabricated data.
3. The Publisher obliges the authors of papers to disclose the contributions of individual authors, identifying their affiliation and contribution, i.e. information on who has authored the concepts, assumptions, methods, protocol, etc. used in the preparation of the paper, with the main responsibility for its contents resting on the submitter.
4. The Publisher deems ‘ghostwriting’ and ‘guest authorship’ to be scientific misconduct, and states that all discovered cases will be denounced, including the notification of any appropriate organisations — the employers of the authors, scientific societies, associations of scientific editors, etc.
5. ‘Ghostwriting’ occurs when somebody has made a significant contribution to creating a work/publication without their role being disclosed as one of the authors, or without mentioning their role in the acknowledgements.
6. ‘Guest authorship’ (‘honorary authorship’) occurs when the author’s contribution minimal or non-existent, but despite this they have been credited as an author of the work/publication.
7. The Publisher asks authors to provide information on any possible sources of financing for the work/publication, contributions from research institutions, societies and other organisation (‘financial disclosure’).
8. In the process of evaluating scientific papers, the Publisher applies COPE procedures. More information on the applied procedures is available on the Publisher’s website: https://www.beck.pl/zasady-publikacji/zasady-etyki-publikacyjnej/
9. A recommendation (review) by a scientific supervisor should be attached to each article sent to the Publisher by graduates of law faculties, doctoral candidates, assistant professors, trainee legal advisers and trainee attorneys.
10. Papers should be sent to the Publisher in a WORD file format.
11. The initial assessment of the paper in terms of its merits is made by selected editors of a certain edition of the journal.
12. Upon their initial acceptance, the papers are sent for scientific review (a double blind review process applies).
13. A list of reviewers cooperating with the Publisher can be found on the journal’s website. If necessary, the Publisher may refer to a person who is not on that list.
14. Each review ends with a clear and uniform conclusion regarding the paper’s admission for publication, its correction, or its rejection.
15. Papers that fail to meet the above requirements will be not accepted for publishing.

12345678

The editorial team of “Studies in Private Law” exercises the highest degree of care to ensure that ethical standards are kept in scientific publications, according to the ethical standards of C.H.Beck https://www.beck.pl/zasady-publikacji/zasady-etyki-publikacyjnej/ .

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)

Ethical standards

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. The Publisher obliges the authors of papers to disclose the contributions of individual authors, identifying their affiliation and contribution, i.e. information as to who has authored the concepts, assumptions, methods, protocol, etc. used in the preparation of the paper, with the main responsibility for its contents resting on the submitter.
2. The Publisher obliges authors to provide information on any possible sources of financing for the work/publication, contributions from research institutions, societies and other organisation to the publication (‘financial disclosure’). The Publisher is obliged to place information on the financial contribution of those organisations in the publication.
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. The Publisher announces that ‘ghostwriting’ and ‘guest authorship’ are manifestations of scientific misconduct, and that all disclosed cases will be denounced, including the notification of appropriate organisations – the employers of the authors, scientific societies, associations of scientific editors, etc. In accordance with the publishing standards:
   • ‘ghostwriting’ occurs when somebody has made a significant contribution to creating a work/publication without disclosing their role as one of the authors or without mentioning their role in the acknowledgements;
   • ‘guest authorship’ (‘honorary authorship’) occurs when the contribution of the author is minimal or non-existent, but notwithstanding this she has been credited as an author of the work/publication.

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 in a double-blind review process and author’s data shall not be disclosed to reviewers, and reviewer’s data shall not be disclosed to authors.
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.

Redaktor Naczelny:
Prof. Bogudar Kordasiewicz

Zastępca Redaktora Naczelnego:
Dr Mateusz Grochowski

Rada Naukowa Systemu Prawa Prywatnego:
Prof. Edward Gniewek
Prof. Wojciech J. Katner
Prof. Ewa Łętowska
Prof. Adam Olejniczak
Prof. Adam Opalski 
Prof. Konrad Osajda
Prof. Maksymilian Pazdan
Prof. Jerzy Rajski
Prof. Michał Romanowski
Prof. Marek Safjan
Prof. Ryszard Skubisz
Prof. Tadeusz Smyczyński
Prof. Stanisław Sołtysiński
Prof. Andrzej Szajkowski
Prof. Andrzej Szumański

Rada Naukowa:
Prof. Aleksander Belohlávek
Prof. Fabrizio Cafaggi
Prof. Stefan Grundmann
Prof. Piotr Machnikowski
Prof. Ulrich Magnus
Prof. Chantal Mak
Prof. Michael Martinek
Prof. Florian Möslein
Dr hab. Tomasz Niedziński
Prof. Wojciech Popiołek
Dr hab. Tomasz Szanciło
Prof. Monika Tarska
Dr hab. prof.ucz. Rafał Wrzecionek
Prof. Mariusz Załucki

Ewa Bagińska
Mirosław Bączyk
Aleksander Bělohlávek
Patryk Bender
Jerzy Bieluk
Magdalena Bławat
Witold Borysiak
Adam Brzozowski
Wojciech Brzozowski
Joanna Buchalska
Fabrizio Cafaggi
Olga Ceran
Aleksander Chłopecki
Magdalena Deneka
Przemysław Drapała
Maciej Giaro
Edward Gniewek
Krzysztof Gołębiowski
Kacper Górniak
Mateusz Grochowski
Stefan Grundmann
Jan Halberda
Monika Grażyna Jagielska
Agnieszka Jabłonowska
Andrzej Jakubecki
Jacek Jastrzębski
Stefanie Jung
Wojciech J. Katner
Paweł Księżak
Michał Kućka
Katarzyna Kopaczyńska-Pieczniak
Bogudar Kordasiewicz
Marcin Krajewski
Bogusław Lackoroński
Monika Leszczyńska
Joanna A. Luzak
Ewa Łętowska
Piotr Machnikowski
Ulrich Magnus
Chantal Mak
Michael Martinek
Andrzej Matlak
Andrzej Mączyński
Florian Möslein
Krzysztof Mularski
Tomasz Niedziński
Adrian Marcin Niewęgłowski
Artur Nowacki
Magdalena Olczyk
Adam Olejniczak
Janina Panowicz-Lipska
Marlena Pecyna
Francesco Paolo Patti
Jakub Pawliczak
Maksymilian Pazdan
Mateusz Józef Pilich
Krzysztof Pietrzykowski
Wojciech Popiołek
Agnieszka Pyrzyńska
Jerzy Rajski
Krzysztof Riedl
Przemysław Pałka
Karolina Panfil
Małgorzata Pyziak-Szafnicka
Ewa Rott-Pietrzyk
Marek Safjan
Anna Natalia Schultz
Ewa Skibińska
Ryszard Skubisz
Agnieszka Smoleńska
Tadeusz Smyczyński
Stanisław Sołtysiński
Andrzej Stempniak
Ewa Rott-Pietrzyk
Radosław Strugała
Andrzej Szajkowski
Tomasz Szanciło
Agnieszka Sztoldman
Andrzej Szumański
Janusz Szwaja
Monika Tarska
Paweł tokarski
Monika Wałachowska
Anne-Marie Weber
Jan Winczorek
Bartosz Wołodkiewicz
Fryderyk Zoll
Łukasz Żelechowski