Legitimacy to processs (the fourth year of study)

A lecture on the procedure is difficult. Although he is in year 4 of study, many students do not pass the exam. Not much of this lecture can be understood in order to understand what it refers to. The entire manual is dotted with definitions: admissibility of the court proceedings, civil case in formal and material sense, formal and material legitimacy, public and undisclosed meetings, judicial proceedings.

Then: dismiss the lawsuit, return the action dismissed. After reworking 3/4 of the manual, I came across Schroedinger’s cat in the KPC: “standing to trial” (standing to trial). The handbook explained that standing in a strict sense is mistakenly referred to by some as formal standing to distinguish it from substantive legitimacy.

The concept of substantive legitimacy, prof. Broniewicz explained, is also incorrect, because it really means “the existence of an individual-specific legal norm cited in the action”. After explaining what legitimacy is not, Prof. Broniewicz promoted his own definition, which reads as follows: “Standing to bring proceedings is vested in an entity which is covered by an individual-specific rule of law cited in the action, regardless of whether that standard exists or not”. It is really, in my opinion, the best.