currently accepted that only 5% of start-ups in the technology industry are
successful. This fact means that, in principle, the investor has as much as a
95% risk of losing money. However, if the investment turns out to work with no
failure the investors may gain millions.
innovative the subject matter the bigger the risk
example of a risky investment is a highly discussed case of Elizabeth Holmes.
She is the founder of biotech start-up, Theranos. The main concept of her
business was to create a blood-testing method which promises to detect a range
of illnesses with just a prick on the fingertip. She based her business idea on
her fear of needles. One device would replace professional laboratory machines.
The technology was supposed to revolutionize the healthcare industry. As this
idea seemed futuristic and innovative it
is no surprise that it seduced many high-profile investors that invested
millions into this business. Silicon
Valley investors have poured more than $200 million into projects in the past
years to build a device that analyzes blood – according to ‘Financial Times’. However,
in 2015 it emerged the blood-testing devices did not work and Theranos was
doing most of its testing on commercially available machines made by other
manufacturers. The company shut down three years later. Numerous problems have
arisen since then. The invention gave false results, resulted to undetected
diseases. As it later turned out, it was not the machine that tested the
samples, but a team of people appointed to do so. The machine was only an
object of advertising and marketing. Now Ms. Holmes faces 12 fraud charges and
she is accused of deceiving investors and patients with defrauding investors
through a ‘sophisticated, multi-year fraud’.
business obtained one of its first financings in 2004 from a well-known
investor from Silicon Valley, Tim Draper. Theranos founder began collaboration
with former senior U.S. government officials to serve on the board of
directors. Among them were: George Shultz (former Secretary of Labor, Treasury,
and State of the US government), Gen. James Mattis (US Secretary of Defense),
Henry Kissinger (former Secretary of State), William Perry (former Secretary of
Defense), Betsy DeVos (US Secretary of Education) and many other successful
surprising that highly respectable, influential people did not even ask Holmes
for detailed financial analysis and accurate product information. They have
lost millions of dollars because of being too superficial in their due
British auction house Christie’s is where spectacular auctions take
place. Transactions that are carried out there are mentioned all over the
world. Many Christie’s auctions attract interest due to the fact that they may
be controversial, such as sale of an image created by artificial intelligence
or the work entitled “Femme assise près d’une fenêtre
(Marie-Thérèse)” by Pablo Picasso. Recently Christie’s announced that
another innovative auction is planned.
Namely its October “Post-War to Present” auction will include the
sale of 31 non-fungible tokens that are considered to be some of the oldest on
the Ethereum blockchain. A non-fungible token (NFT) is a unit of data stored on
a digital ledger, called a blockchain, that certifies a digital asset to be
unique and therefore not interchangeable. This will be the first ever live
auction with bidding conducted entirely in Ether. The NFTs that Christie’s is
offering in the fall have distinct legacies of their own. They are also
estimated to sell for between 250 and 350 ETH, which shakes out to
approximately between $870,000 and $1.3 million. These NFTs are Curio Cards that
were made in May 2017, so even earlier than CryptoPunks and CryptoKitties.
Aside from the Curio Cards NFTs, Christie’s will be auctioning NFTs
from the Art Blocks curated collection. Modern artists would have possibility
to choose their favourite post-war artworks and pay for them in Ethereum. The
tokens are representing real-world objects like art, music, in-game items,
videos and other seemingly mundane everyday signifiers. Works by renowned
artists such as Helen Frankenthaler, Elaine de Kooning, Joan Mitchell and Grace
Hartigan will be part of the auction alongside works by Wayne Thiebaud.
The event definitely created a buzz among art enthusiasts. NFTs are highly valued digital assets which
uses blockchain to record the ownership status of the aforementioned items. After
the transaction only the buyer of an NFT has the official of being its owner.
However anyone can still view the item.
Recently, several large cryptocurrency-based auctions have brought
in huge amounts of money in the art world. The upcoming “Post-War to
Present” auction is sure to create a buzz among currency enthusiasts. One
thing we can be sure of – a digital revolution is coming, and the world of
cryptocurrencies will surprise us more than once.
More and more often, foreign clients of
KIEŁTYKA GŁADKOWSKI KG LEGAL take part in online hearings as a part of civil
lawsuits. This also applies to foreign witnesses in commercial proceedings
conducted for foreign clients and settled by the Polish civil courts.
The widespread use of remote (online)
questioning of witnesses results from a temporary change in the Polish civil
procedure, which adapted the practice of conducting court cases in the
realities of the pandemic. The proliferation of the practice of questioning
witnesses has created the standard practice of summoning foreign witnesses in
writing by document, which the Polish court delivers by conventional mail to
the witness’ address and summons the witness to participate in the online
hearing. The court in such a letter explains in great detail to the witness how
and when the witness is to connect to the court online.
Due to the fact that the court informs the
foreign witness in great detail about how the foreign witness is to connect
online with the Polish court using a computer, KIELTYKA GLADKOWSKI KG LEGAL
presents below the full content of the Polish Court’s summons and instructions.
It may turn out to be very helpful for
foreign readers doing business in Poland, because this type of summons is very
standard and is used in a very similar way by all Polish common courts.
The summons begins with the designation of
the court by which the summons is issued. Full text of the summons together
with instructions on the consequences of failure to appear online is presented
The epidemic caused by the Covid-19 virus has
significantly introduced changes in the search for safe solutions for
people-to-people contact. These changes also affected the courts and the mode
of court hearings, in order to ensure the greatest possible safety for the
parties to the proceedings and court employees. In this situation, the best way
to limit direct contact was the possibility of using electronic communication
Amendment to the Polish Act of March 2, 2020
on special solutions related to the prevention, counteraction and combating of
COVID-19, other infectious diseases and the emergencies caused by them,
implemented by two acts of May 14, 2020 and May 28, 2021, allowed for the
possibility of holding court hearings in Polish courts with using means of
distance communication. The change resulting directly from article 15 zzs1
of the Polish Act of 2 March 2020 allowed for the possibility of participating
in a remote hearing from a place other than the court, because until now the Polish
Code of Civil Procedure allowed for the possibility of conducting a remote
hearing, but the persons participating in it had to be present in the court
building. Pursuant to article 15zzs1 point 1 of the Polish Act of 2
March 2020, during the period of the epidemic threat or epidemic state
announced due to COVID-19 and within one year of the last of them being
recalled in cases examined under the provisions of the Polish Code of Civil
Procedure, court hearings or open sessions are held with the use of technical
devices enabling them to be carried out at a distance with the simultaneous
direct transmission of image and sound, except that the people participating in them
do not have to be in the court building, unless holding a hearing or a public
hearing without the use of the above devices causes excessive health risk to
interrogation of a foreign witness by a Polish court in a commercial court case
– practical bullet points on the example of a specific witness summons.
The changes in the functioning of the
justice system caused by the COVID-19 have been ongoing since the first quarter
of 2020. The first of them were introduced in the Polish legal system at the
beginning of March 2020, and to date these regulations have already been
amended several times. The changes mainly concern court proceedings, the way in
which cases are dealt with, as well as the issue of questioning witnesses. The
present article will focus on the latter issue, in order to explain in detail
how a witness is summoned and examined by a Polish court.
In accordance with article 15 zzs1
of the Polish Act of March 2, 2020 on special solutions related to the
prevention, counteraction and combating of COVID-19, other infectious diseases
and crisis situations caused by them (hereinafter as the “Act”):