Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

English (EN)·Polski (PL)·Yкраїнський (UK)
Przejdź do strony domowej biblioteki Centralna Biblioteka Wojskowa Link otwiera się w nowym oknie Logo biblioteki Prolib Integro - strona głównaCentralna Biblioteka Wojskowa

Wyszukujesz frazę "criminal evidence" wg kryterium: Temat

  Lista filtrów
Wyrównaj
Wyświetlanie 1-10 z 51
Tytuł:
Analiza ustawowych znamion przestępstwa z punktu widzenia sposobu ich dowodzenia w procesie karnym. Wybrane przykłady
Autorzy:
Gardocka, Teresa
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/48558902.pdf
Data publikacji:
2023-01-23
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego
Tematy:
elements of crime
criminal evidence
legislation
Opis:
The problem of criminal evidence is a very important factor of the establishment of the elements of a crime from the point of view of a criminalstatute’s conformity with the rule of law. For the criminal court the elements of crime in the criminal statute show what should be proven for the sentencing judgment to be passed in a given case. For the defendant accused of committing a of crime it shows the possibility of defence. The accused person may prove that some elements of the crime are not met in his or her case. A too broad description of the elements of a crime allows for a considerable degree of freedom in the attribution of perpetration of a crime. In this sense criminalisation before the social harmfulness of the act is realised may be less dangerous for the legal order than an overly broad description of the crime.
Źródło:
Studia Iuridica; 2022, 93; 84-93
0137-4346
Pojawia się w:
Studia Iuridica
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Admissibility of Evidence Obtained as a Result of Issuing an European Investigation Order in a Polish Criminal Trial
Autorzy:
Kuczyńska, Hanna
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1597366.pdf
Data publikacji:
2021-08-21
Wydawca:
Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II
Tematy:
admissibility of evidence, evidence in criminal trial, European Investigative Order, Polish criminal trial
Opis:
This article analyses the admissibility of evidence gathered by the Polish procedural authorities as a  result of issuing an European Investigation Order, on the basis of provisions implemented due to the adoption on the 3th of April 2014 of the Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters. This Directive created a mechanism that allows for transfer of evidence between EU Member States. In this text the question will be answered how to deal with results of investigative measures that have been legally obtained in the executing state but despite acting in accordance with the legality principle by both states, happen to be illegal in the issuing Member State. Another discussed problem is how the rules of admissibility of evidence obtained from the result of issuing an EIO work in Poland – or at least how they should operate. The second discussed issue thus will refer to the current provisions in force in Poland regulating the method of dealing with evidence obtained abroad – that is also with evidence transferred from other Member States. It will be shown that they are unclear and may lead to undesirable results. In addition,  suggested changes in Polish law will be proposed.
Źródło:
Review of European and Comparative Law; 2021, 46, 3; 67-92
2545-384X
Pojawia się w:
Review of European and Comparative Law
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Limits of the evidence initiative of the court of first instance and the reliable evidence procedure
Autorzy:
Skwarcow, Marek
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/52089869.pdf
Data publikacji:
2024
Wydawca:
Uczelnia Łazarskiego. Oficyna Wydawnicza
Tematy:
criminal proceedings, evidence initiative of the court, impartiality of the judge, reliable evidence proceedings, the accused
Opis:
This article aims to delineate the boundaries of the evidence initiative of the Court of the First Instance, which bears the responsibility to fulfil the goals of criminal proceedings, as outlined in Article 2 § 1 item 1 and § 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, from the perspective of evidence reliability, an essential component of the fair criminal trial concept. The court’s evidentiary actionswere thus examined through the lens of requirements stemming from Article 6(1) and (3) of the ECHR, especially the principles of independence, impartiality, adversarial process, immediacy, and access to criminal proceeding materials. The article adopts a dogmatic approach, building on an analysis of current national legal standards and the Rome Convention’s provisions, viewed through doctrine and jurisprudence of national courts and the Court in Strasbourg. This makes the publication relevant for both legal scholars and practitioners involved in criminal proceedings. The analysis suggests that the court’s initiative to introduce evidence, its methods of evidence gathering, and access to collected materials during proceedings must not curtail the rights of the parties, especially the accused, to conduct their evidentiary activities. Depriving the court of the primacy of independence and impartiality, restricting the parties’ capacity to engage in dispute in favour of an inquisitorial jurisdictional body violates the right to fair evidentiary proceedings. The court, in safeguarding the principle of material truth, must remember its role as a justice administrator and balance all arguments accordingly. Seeking evidence solely to establish the accused’s guilt contradicts the procedural function of adjudication and compromises the court’s neutrality, making it an extension of the prosecution. Hence, a thorough elucidation of case circumstances by the court should not disempower the parties, particularly regarding their initiative to present evidence.
Źródło:
Ius Novum; 2024, 18, 1 ENG; 80-98
1897-5577
Pojawia się w:
Ius Novum
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
European Investigation Order – Selected Problems on Polish Implementation
Autorzy:
Woźniewski, Krzysztof Wiesław
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1597390.pdf
Data publikacji:
2021-08-21
Wydawca:
Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II
Tematy:
European Investigative Order, investigative measures, evidence, Polish criminal procedure
Opis:
The paper presents selected key problems of Directive 2014/41/EU regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters within the context of its Polish implementation in 2018. The paper focuses on the concept of investigative measures, administration of justice and exclusionary evidence rules as a limitation of issuing a Polish EIO. Additionally, the study attempts to approximate the reduced procedural mechanism in the context of issuing the ECI.
Źródło:
Review of European and Comparative Law; 2021, 46, 3; 145-164
2545-384X
Pojawia się w:
Review of European and Comparative Law
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Granice inicjatywy dowodowej sądu pierwszej instancji a rzetelne postępowanie dowodowe
Limits of the evidence initiative of the court of first instance and the reliable evidence procedure
Autorzy:
Skwarcow, Marek
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/52089846.pdf
Data publikacji:
2024
Wydawca:
Uczelnia Łazarskiego. Oficyna Wydawnicza
Tematy:
postępowanie karne, inicjatywa dowodowa sądu, bezstronność sędziego, rzetelne postępowanie dowodowe, oskarżony
criminal proceedings, evidence initiative of the court, impartiality of the judge, reliable evidence proceedings, the accused
Opis:
Celem niniejszego artykułu jest określenie granic inicjatywy dowodowej sądu pierwszej instancji, który obarczony jest obowiązkiem realizacji celów postępowania karnego wyrażonych w art. 2 § 1 pkt 1 i § 2 k.p.k., ocenianych z punktu widzenia rzetelności postępowania dowodowego, będącego elementem koncepcji rzetelnego procesu karnego. Aktywność dowodowa sądu została więc poddana analizie przez pryzmat warunków, jakie wynikają z art. 6 ust. 1 i 3 EKPC, w szczególności zasad niezawisłości, bezstronności, kontradyktoryjności, bezpośredniości i warunku dostępu do materiałów postępowania karnego. Artykuł ma charakter dogmatyczny, jest oparty na analizie obowiązujących norm prawa krajowego i przepisów Konwencji Rzymskiej, tak z punktu widzenia poglądów doktryny, jak i orzecznictwa sądów krajowych oraz Trybunału w Strasburgu, przez co publikacja jest przeznaczona zarówno dla przedstawicieli doktryny, jak i prawników praktyków – uczestników postępowania karnego. Na podstawie tej analizy można przyjąć, że inicjatywa dowodowa sądu ujęta w szerszym znaczeniu, czyli rozumiana jako uprawnienie do wprowadzania dowodów na forum rozprawy głównej, sposób (metodę) przeprowadzenia dowodu i prawo dostępu do materiałów zgromadzonych w toku postępowania, nie może ograniczać prawa stron postępowania, w tym zwłaszcza strony słabszej, jaką jest oskarżony, do podejmowania własnej aktywności dowodowej. Pozbawienie sądu prymatu niezawisłości i bezstronności, ograniczenie stron w możliwości prowadzenia sporu na rzecz inkwizycyjnie działającego organu postępowania jurysdykcyjnego naruszają prawo do rzetelnego postępowania dowodowego. Sąd, strzegąc wartości, jaką jest prawda materialna, nie powinien nigdy zapominać, że jego rolą jest wymierzanie sprawiedliwości – jest więc ważącym wszystkie racje arbitrem. Poszukiwanie dowodów tylko w celu udowodnienia winy oskarżonego kłóci zatem się z istotą funkcji procesowej orzekania i powoduje, że sąd staje się kolejnym rzecznikiem oskarżenia. Wszechstronne wyjaśnienie przez sąd okoliczności sprawy nie może zatem prowadzić do wytrącenia stronom oręża z ręki, jakim jest bez wątpienia ich inicjatywa dowodowa.
This article aims to delineate the boundaries of the evidence initiative of the Court of the First Instance, which bears the responsibility to fulfil the goals of criminal proceedings, as outlined in Article 2 § 1 item 1 and § 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, from the perspective of evidence reliability, an essential component of the fair criminal trial concept. The court’s evidentiary actions were thus examined through the lens of requirements stemming from Article 6(1) and (3) of the ECHR, especially the principles of independence, impartiality, adversarial process, immediacy, and access to criminal proceeding materials. The article adopts a dogmatic approach, building on an analysis of current national legal standards and the Rome Convention’s provisions, viewed through doctrine and jurisprudence of national courts and the Court in Strasbourg. This makes the publication relevant for both legal scholars and practitioners involved in criminal proceedings. The analysis suggests that the court’s initiative to introduce evidence, its methods of evidence gathering, and access to collected materials during proceedings must not curtail the rights of the parties, especially the accused, to conduct their evidentiary activities. Depriving the court of the primacy of independence and impartiality, restricting the parties’ capacity to engage in dispute in favour of an inquisitorial jurisdictional body violates the right to fair evidentiary proceedings. The court, in safeguarding the principle of material truth, must remember its role as a justice administrator and balance all arguments accordingly. Seeking evidence solely to establish the accused’s guilt contradicts the procedural function of adjudication and compromises the court’s neutrality, making it an extension of the prosecution. Hence, a thorough elucidation of case circumstances by the court should not disempower the parties, particularly regarding their initiative to present evidence.
Źródło:
Ius Novum; 2024, 18, 1; 84-103
1897-5577
Pojawia się w:
Ius Novum
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
До 90-річча Ю.М. Грошевого: внесок видатного вченого в розвиток теорії і практики кримінального процесуального доказування
Mark the 90th Anniversary of the Birth Of Y.M. Hroshevyi: Contribution of an Outstanding Scientist to the Development of the Theory and Practice of Criminal Procedure Evidence
Autorzy:
Bespalko, Inna
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/2076553.pdf
Data publikacji:
2022-06-30
Wydawca:
Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek
Tematy:
outstanding scientist
Yurii Mykhailovych Hroshevyi
criminal procedure evidence
proof
the CPC of Ukraine
видатний вчений
Юрій Михайлович Грошевий
КПК України
кримінальне процесуальне доказування
докази
Opis:
On April 13, 2012 (10 years ago) Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine decided to approve the new Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine (hereinafter referred to as the CPC of Ukraine), which was primarily developed with international and European standards in the field of criminal justice as reference. Thus, Art.9 of the CPC of Ukraine originally indicates the need to take into account the practice of the European Court of Human Rights in the process of applying criminal procedure legislation at the level of the law. The new CPC of Ukraine is conveniently structured. Many evaluative concepts appeared (for example, reasonableness of terms). The adoption of the CPC of Ukraine in 2012 can be generally called a «positive breakthrough» for the legislation of Ukraine in the whole. I would like to highlight the following аmong the most progressive provisions: –– entirely new institutions were introduced, for example, the institution of agreements in criminal procedure, which is an agreement between the parties formalized in the relevant service document and aimed at settling the criminal law conflict; –– Article 45 of the new CPC of Ukraine clearly established that a lawyer can only act as a defense counsel in criminal proceedings, thereby prohibiting «specialists in the field of law» from carrying out defense; –– the need to distinguish between crimes and criminal offenses was clearly defined for the first time at the legislative level, and the features of the investigation of the criminal offenses were formulated as well; –– a separate chapter «Foundations of criminal proceedings» appeared where the legislature fixed 22 general foundations in accordance with which criminal legal proceeding should be carried out; –– a procedure for a special pre-trial investigation or special judicial proceedings (in absentia) in respect of a suspect, except for a minor who is hiding from the investigation authorities and the court in order to evade criminal liability if he is outside Ukraine; –– the law provides for a special arrangements of pre-trial investigation in conditions of martial law, a state of 9 emergency or in the area of an antiterrorist operation; –– another innovation is a significant expansion of the functioning of the court to monitor the observance of the rights and freedoms of the parties to criminal proceedings during the pre-trial investigation, as well as the introduction of the institute of the investigating judge as a person specially authorized to exercise such control for the given purpose. Almost all criminal procedure institutions were generally improved in the new Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine.
13 квітня 2012 року (10 років тому) Верховною Радою України було прийнято рішення про затвердження нового Кримінального процесуального кодексу України (далі – КПК України), який було розроблено в першу чергу орієнтуючись на міжнародні та європейські стандарти у сфері кримінальної юстиції. Так, в ст. 9 КПК України вперше на рівні закону вказується необхідність враховувати практику Європейського суду з прав людини в процесі застосування кримінального процесуального законодавства. Новий КПК України зручно структурований. В ньому з’явилося багато оціночних понять (наприклад, розумність строків). Загалом прийняття КПК України 2012 року можна назвати «позитивним проривом» для законодавства України в цілому. Серед найбільш прогресивних положень хотілося б виділити наступні: –– були введені абсолютно нові інститути, наприклад, інститут угод у кримінальному процесі, який являє собою домовленість сторін, яка формалізована у відповідному процесуальному документі і спрямована на врегулювання кримінально-правового конфлікту; –– статтею 45 нового КПК України було чітко встановлено, що захисником у кримінальному провадженні може бути виключно адвокат, тим самим заборонивши здійснювати захист «фахівцям у галузі права»; –– вперше на законодавчому рівні була чітко визначена необхідність розмежовувати злочини та кримінальні проступки, а також сформульовано особливості розслідування останніх; –– з›явилася окрема глава «Засади кримінального провадження», де законодавець закріпив 22 загальні засади, відповідно до яких має здійснюватися кримінальне судочинство; –– передбачено процедуру спеціального досудового розслідування або спеціального судового провадження (in absentia) відносно підозрюваного, крім неповнолітнього, який переховується від органів слідства та суду з метою ухилення від кримінальної відповідальності, якщо він перебуває поза межами України; –– закон передбачає особливий режим досудового розслідування в умовах воєнного, надзвичайного стану або у районі проведення антитерористичної операції; –– однією з новацій також є суттєве розширення функції суду щодо контролю за дотриманням прав і свобод сторін кримінального провадження під час досудового розслідування, а також запровадження з цією метою інституту слідчого судді, як особи, яка спеціально уповноважується на здійснення такого контролю. Загалом у новому КПК України удосконалено майже всі кримінально-процесуальні інститути.
Źródło:
Krakowskie Studia Małopolskie; 2022, 2(34); 167-178
1643-6911
Pojawia się w:
Krakowskie Studia Małopolskie
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
The mandatory presence of the Public Prosecutor’s Office at the hearing of the criminal investigation in face of the new law of the anticrime package and the need for revision of brazilian jurisprudence – prohibition of ex officio production of evidence by the magistrate
Autorzy:
Maior de Almeida, Rosemary Souto
da Silva, Müller Aureliano
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/2158878.pdf
Data publikacji:
2022
Wydawca:
Krakowska Akademia im. Andrzeja Frycza Modrzewskiego
Tematy:
criminal procedure
accusatory system
evidence production
Opis:
Brazil has been going through a great change in its Legislative scenario, bringing several incorporations in the fields of law where the validity of Law n. Law no. 13,964/19 brought changes to the Penal Code, Code of Criminal Procedure and Criminal Execution Law. The Brazilian Criminal Procedure is governed by the Accusatory System and, through this article, we sought to better analyze an application of the aforementioned Law as a way to ratify the system adopted in the Brazilian criminal procedure, the accusatory, as well as to bring the view of the need for readjustment, by the Brazilian courts, with regard to the production of evidence by the Magistrate without the participation of the representative of the Public Ministry in the criminal instruction hearings, thus corroborating the understanding that the participation of the Members of the Public Ministry in the hearings is essential. This systematic study sought a brief improvement in the systems that govern criminal proceedings, as well as focusing on the application of the sources of Law within criminal proceedings, with the Law being the immediate source and, as such, it should take precedence over the sources secondary, such as jurisprudence, for example, make it clear that the Public Prosecutor’s Office is an essential body to the provision of jurisdiction, acting in a plicit manner, that is, acting not only as an Accuser in Criminal Actions, but also as an inspector of the body of law in any action that intervenes, including public.
Źródło:
Studia Prawnicze: rozprawy i materiały; 2022, (30), 1; 141-148
1689-8052
2451-0807
Pojawia się w:
Studia Prawnicze: rozprawy i materiały
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Irregularly obtainment of evidence (article 168a CCP) in the aspect of exclusion of freedom expression of interrogated
Autorzy:
Koper, Radosław
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/19233708.pdf
Data publikacji:
2023-03-31
Wydawca:
Wyższa Szkoła Finansów i Prawa w Bielsku-Białej
Tematy:
freedom of expression
interrogation
criminal proceedings
irregularly obtained evidence
permissibility of evidence
Opis:
The Article 168a of Code of Criminal Procedure introduces the rule of the permissibility in criminal proceedings evidence obtained under the violation of criminal procedure regulations or as the result of indictable offence defined in Article 1 of Criminal Code. The Article 168a of CCP is highly controversial, especially due to the lack of linguistic precision of its provision and collision with Constitution. The regulation mentioned above is in conflict with the system of evidence-related prohibitions in criminal proceedings. In this context, the freedom expression rule during the interrogation is essential. Its violation results in the prohibition of the use of evidence. Used in the provision of Art. 168a of CCP, word „exclusively” is claimed to be a key for proper resolution of this problem. If interpreted differently, the provision would flagrantly deny the essence and nature of the freedom expression rule during the interrogation
Źródło:
Zeszyty Naukowe Wyższej Szkoły Finansów i Prawa w Bielsku-Białej; 2023, 27, 1; 38-44
2543-9103
2543-411X
Pojawia się w:
Zeszyty Naukowe Wyższej Szkoły Finansów i Prawa w Bielsku-Białej
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Ograniczenie zasady działania sądu z urzędu i jego wpływ na wyrokowanie
Autorzy:
Sobczak, Jacek
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/2225755.pdf
Data publikacji:
2014-12-31
Wydawca:
Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek
Tematy:
adversarial principle
criminal proceedings
reform of the criminal process
court
prosecutor
rules of evidence
Opis:
The adversarial principle is merely the name of a specific type of organizing process, not a specific Directive of criminal proceedings. The adversarial principle is uniformly recognized as non-codified directive, according to which the criminal process is conducted in the form of equal sides dispute before the impartial court. The adversarial principle in criminal proceedings is something other than adversarial in civil proceedings. The adversarial principle was exposed in the course of work on the revision of the Code of criminal proceedings. The creators of the reform emphasized that Article 167 § 1 of the Code of criminal proceedings differently than it did before, sets out the rules of proof, giving this task in the hands of the parties, leaving only the court admissibility of evidence, and reducing the possibility of taking evidence by the court to exceptional cases justified special circumstances. The creators of the reform emphasized that Article 167 § 1 of the Code of criminal proceedings differently than it did before, sets out the rules of taking of evidence, giving this process to the parties, leaving only the admissibility of evidence to the court, and reducing the possibility of taking evidence by the court to exceptional cases justified by special circumstances. Will be changed the rules for transfer of the court materials from preliminary proceedings. Another important issue is the systematization of the list of evidence, in accordance with the modified Article 333 § 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and solutions for planning of court hearings. May cause discussions restriction the possibility of taking the initiative of the evidence by the court. The changes enforce proactive stance of the accused, even though he should be able to take advantage of the „right to silence”. Militate against the principle of adversarial problems brought to light on the background of the appeal proceedings. You can express its concern that the adversarial principle in the present approach will detrimental to the presumption of innocence, leading to a model of „proceedings for the rich”. These changes will force to remodel the psyche of judges who feel guilty persons determining cases of dispute run by the parties, not the players involved who have the task of replacing the prosecutor.
Źródło:
Themis Polska Nova; 2014, 2(7); 27-43
2084-4522
Pojawia się w:
Themis Polska Nova
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Criminological and penal aspects of issuing a false opinion by an expert witness - draft report on research project with proposals for changes in the law determining the legal status of expert witnesses
Autorzy:
Jóźwicki, Krzysztof
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1934138.pdf
Data publikacji:
2020-04-21
Wydawca:
Wyższa Szkoła Policji w Szczytnie
Tematy:
expert
evidence
false expert opinion
criminal procedural law
corruption
judiciary
Opis:
Evidence in the form of an expert opinion is usually of key importance for settling a pending case in any type of proceedings. In some cases, the role of the expert witness is closer to that of a judge rather than that of a witness, since a judge who does not have special knowledge often has to use evidence given by an expert to render a judgement. For this reason, issuing a false expert opinion results in a very high risk of delivering a wrong and unfair decision in a given case, which in turn has a negative impact on the social perception of the functioning of the justice system. In the Polish Criminal Code, criminal responsibility for issuing a false opinion is stipulated in Article 233 (4) and (4a) of the Penal Code. At the same time, despite a very large number of reports of suspicion that a crime has been committed by an expert witness, only a negligible number of investigations result in a bill of indictment and a conviction, which causes virtual impunity of perpetrators and has a negative impact on the functioning of criminal justice. Due to the diagnosed research gap in this area, the need to investigate and describe the phenomenon of issuing false opinions by expert witnesses, both in normative and criminological terms, on the basis of empirical research, has been clearly seen. The main objective of the research has been to characterise the phenomenon in question on many levels and to determine its real extent, its etiology and symptomatology. An additional aim of the research has been the verifi cation of research hypotheses and recognition of the normative sphere of the expert witness’s status, expert evidence, and principles of responsibility for issuing false opinions. The research fi ndings have resulted in proposals of solutions aimed both at limiting the phenomenon of issuing false opinions and more effective prosecution of perpetrators of crimes under Article 233 (4) of the Penal Code, which in turn may translate into more effi cient functioning of the entire justice system, as expert witnesses and their work are an extremely important aspect of thereof. The conducted research has fully confi rmed the research hypotheses and precisely indicated defective areas of expert evidence, and consequently the need to introduce immediate legislative changes. Some of the research conclusions and de lege ferenda postulates were implemented into the amended provisions of the Penal Code in 2016, which fully confi rms their legitimacy. Unfortunately, there is still no legal act of statutory rank which would comprehensively regulate the status of expert witnesses and expert evidence.
Źródło:
Przegląd Policyjny; 2019, 136(4); 360-375
0867-5708
Pojawia się w:
Przegląd Policyjny
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Wyświetlanie 1-10 z 51

Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies