Master's Seminar WP-PRZ-SEM-ŁŻ-V

EK1 – Knowledge of the sources and norms of civil law
Related programme learning outcome: PR_W02**

The student knows and understands the sources and nature of civil-law norms, their place within the system of sources of law, and the historical and contemporary factors influencing civil-law regulations in the area related to the topic of the master's thesis.

EK2 – Application of legal knowledge
Related programme learning outcome: PR_U02**

The student is able to use theoretical knowledge of civil law to describe, analyse and resolve legal problems related to the topic of the master's thesis, taking into account the relevant legal provisions, case law and scholarly legal literature.

EK3 – Preparation of a written thesis
Related programme learning outcome: PR_U07**

The student is able to independently prepare a master's thesis in the field of civil law, formulate and justify research hypotheses, conduct doctrinal legal analysis, and correctly use scholarly literature, legal acts and case law in accordance with the principles of academic research and writing.

EK4 – Drafting legal instruments
Related programme learning outcome: PR_U08**

The student is able to draft a basic legislative act or an act applying the law in an area related to civil law, using relevant sources of law and methods of legal analysis and, where necessary, modern information technologies.

EK5 – Presentation of research findings
Related programme learning outcome: PR_U09**

The student is able to prepare and orally present the assumptions, findings and conclusions of research into a selected issue of civil law, provide sound justification for their position, and participate in academic discussion.

EK6 – Independent academic development
Related programme learning outcome: PR_K01**

The student is prepared to independently update and improve their knowledge of civil law, monitor changes in legislation, case law and legal scholarship, and develop the competencies necessary for conducting research and pursuing further professional or academic development.

EK7 – Ethical and professional dilemmas
Related programme learning outcome: PR_K02**

The student is prepared to correctly identify and resolve dilemmas associated with the practice of legal professions, taking into account the principles of professional ethics, academic integrity and responsibility for the assessments and conclusions they formulate.

EK8 – Cooperation and teamwork
Related programme learning outcome: PR_K03**

The student is prepared to cooperate with other seminar participants, assume different roles within a team, participate constructively in discussions, and collaborate in analysing legal problems and evaluating proposed solutions.

The condition of passing the course is submission of the MA thesis prepared by the student and approved by the supervisor, as well as good knowledge of issues from the general part of civil law and its part related to the subject of the thesis.
### EK1 – Knowledge of the sources and norms of civil law (PR_W02)

**2.0 – Fail:** The student does not demonstrate sufficient knowledge of the sources and nature of civil-law norms or is unable to explain their place within the system of sources of law. The student fails to identify the historical and contemporary factors relevant to the subject of the master's thesis.

**3.0 – Satisfactory:** The student demonstrates basic knowledge of the sources and nature of civil-law norms and identifies their place within the system of sources of law. The student indicates the main historical and contemporary factors relevant to the thesis topic, but the explanations are superficial or incomplete.

**3.5 – Satisfactory plus:** The student correctly describes the main sources and characteristics of civil-law norms and explains their place within the system of sources of law. The student identifies relevant historical and contemporary factors, although some explanations lack depth.

**4.0 – Good:** The student demonstrates sound knowledge of the sources and nature of civil-law norms, explains their place within the system of sources of law and correctly discusses the historical and contemporary context relevant to the thesis topic.

**4.5 – Good plus:** The student demonstrates very good knowledge of civil-law norms and their sources, accurately analyses their place within the legal system and discusses relevant historical and contemporary developments with only minor shortcomings.

**5.0 – Very good:** The student demonstrates comprehensive and well-organised knowledge of the sources and nature of civil-law norms, critically analyses their place within the system of sources of law and independently explains the significance of historical and contemporary developments for the subject of the master's thesis.

### EK2 – Application of legal knowledge (PR_U02)

**2.0 – Fail:** The student is unable to apply theoretical knowledge of civil law to analyse legal problems related to the thesis topic. The student does not correctly identify the relevant legal provisions, case law or scholarly opinions.

**3.0 – Satisfactory:** The student applies basic theoretical knowledge to describe a legal problem and identifies some relevant legal provisions, case law or scholarly opinions. The analysis is limited and requires substantial guidance.

**3.5 – Satisfactory plus:** The student correctly applies theoretical knowledge to analyse typical legal problems and uses relevant legal provisions and selected case law or scholarly opinions. Some difficulties remain in developing a coherent analysis.

**4.0 – Good:** The student independently applies theoretical knowledge to analyse and propose solutions to legal problems, appropriately using legal provisions, case law and scholarly opinions.

**4.5 – Good plus:** The student demonstrates a high degree of independence in analysing complex legal problems, critically evaluates relevant sources and presents well-reasoned solutions.

**5.0 – Very good:** The student independently and comprehensively analyses complex legal problems, critically evaluates legal provisions, case law and scholarly opinions, and develops coherent, well-supported conclusions demonstrating a thorough understanding of the subject.

### EK3 – Preparation of a written thesis (PR_U07)

**2.0 – Fail:** The student is unable to prepare a coherent academic text independently. The thesis contains serious deficiencies in structure, research argumentation, legal analysis or the use of sources and does not meet basic academic standards.

**3.0 – Satisfactory:** The student prepares a thesis with a generally identifiable structure and basic analysis of the subject. Research arguments and conclusions are limited, and the use of sources or compliance with academic writing standards requires substantial improvement.

**3.5 – Satisfactory plus:** The student prepares a coherent thesis, formulates basic research arguments and correctly uses the main legal sources and scholarly literature. Some shortcomings remain in the depth of analysis, argumentation or academic presentation.

**4.0 – Good:** The student independently prepares a well-structured thesis, formulates and justifies research hypotheses or arguments, conducts a sound doctrinal legal analysis and uses legal sources and scholarly literature in accordance with academic standards.

**4.5 – Good plus:** The thesis demonstrates a high level of analytical skill, a coherent and well-supported research argument, critical engagement with legal sources and very good compliance with academic writing standards.

**5.0 – Very good:** The student independently prepares a comprehensive, methodologically sound and well-structured thesis. The student formulates and convincingly justifies research arguments, conducts in-depth doctrinal legal analysis, critically evaluates sources and presents original, well-supported conclusions in accordance with the highest academic standards expected at master's level.

### EK4 – Drafting legal instruments (PR_U08)

**2.0 – Fail:** The student is unable to prepare a basic draft of a legislative act or an act applying the law relevant to the subject under consideration, or the draft contains fundamental legal and formal errors.

**3.0 – Satisfactory:** The student prepares a basic draft with substantial guidance. The draft reflects a general understanding of the relevant legal provisions but contains shortcomings in legal reasoning, structure or drafting technique.

**3.5 – Satisfactory plus:** The student prepares a generally correct draft using relevant legal sources. Some errors or inconsistencies remain in its structure, wording or legal justification.

**4.0 – Good:** The student independently prepares a legally sound and appropriately structured draft, applies relevant legal provisions and provides adequate justification for the proposed solution.

**4.5 – Good plus:** The student prepares a well-developed draft, demonstrates very good command of legal drafting techniques and critically considers the consistency and practical implications of the proposed solution.

**5.0 – Very good:** The student independently prepares a comprehensive, legally sound and precisely formulated draft, demonstrates excellent command of legal drafting techniques and convincingly justifies the proposed solution with reference to the relevant legal framework.

### EK5 – Presentation of research findings (PR_U09)

**2.0 – Fail:** The student is unable to present the assumptions, findings or conclusions of their research coherently, does not adequately justify their position and cannot engage meaningfully in academic discussion.

**3.0 – Satisfactory:** The student presents the basic assumptions and findings of their research, but the presentation lacks clarity or structure. The justification of their position is limited, and participation in discussion requires guidance.

**3.5 – Satisfactory plus:** The student presents the main assumptions and findings in a generally clear and structured manner and provides basic justification for their position. Some difficulties remain in responding to questions or developing arguments.

**4.0 – Good:** The student presents research assumptions, findings and conclusions clearly and logically, justifies their position using relevant legal arguments and participates constructively in academic discussion.

**4.5 – Good plus:** The student delivers a well-structured and convincing presentation, demonstrates a high level of command of the subject, responds effectively to questions and engages critically with alternative viewpoints.

**5.0 – Very good:** The student presents research findings in a clear, precise and persuasive manner, convincingly justifies their conclusions, responds independently and accurately to challenging questions and demonstrates excellent ability to participate in academic discussion.

### EK6 – Independent academic development (PR_K01)

**2.0 – Fail:** The student does not demonstrate readiness to independently update or improve their legal knowledge and does not adequately monitor changes in legislation, case law or legal scholarship relevant to the thesis topic.

**3.0 – Satisfactory:** The student recognises the need for further learning and uses basic sources to update their knowledge, but does so inconsistently and mainly when prompted by the supervisor.

**3.5 – Satisfactory plus:** The student regularly consults relevant legal sources and makes efforts to update their knowledge, although the process is not always systematic or sufficiently critical.

**4.0 – Good:** The student independently updates their knowledge, systematically follows relevant legislative changes, case law and legal scholarship, and uses this information to improve the thesis.

**4.5 – Good plus:** The student demonstrates a high degree of initiative in developing their knowledge, critically evaluates new legal materials and consistently incorporates relevant findings into their research.

**5.0 – Very good:** The student demonstrates a sustained and proactive commitment to independent academic development, systematically monitors and critically evaluates changes in law and legal scholarship, and uses the results to deepen their research and identify further avenues of inquiry.

### EK7 – Ethical and professional dilemmas (PR_K02)

**2.0 – Fail:** The student is unable to identify basic ethical or professional dilemmas relevant to legal practice or academic research and does not demonstrate an adequate understanding of the principles of professional ethics and academic integrity.

**3.0 – Satisfactory:** The student identifies basic ethical and professional dilemmas and recognises the importance of professional ethics and academic integrity, but requires guidance to assess possible solutions.

**3.5 – Satisfactory plus:** The student correctly identifies typical ethical and professional dilemmas and proposes generally appropriate solutions, although the justification of their choices may be incomplete.

**4.0 – Good:** The student independently identifies and analyses ethical and professional dilemmas, applies relevant ethical principles and academic integrity standards, and provides reasonable justification for proposed solutions.

**4.5 – Good plus:** The student critically evaluates complex ethical and professional dilemmas, considers alternative courses of action and convincingly justifies their position with reference to relevant principles.

**5.0 – Very good:** The student demonstrates a high degree of ethical awareness and responsibility, independently analyses complex dilemmas, critically evaluates competing arguments and proposes well-reasoned solutions consistent with professional ethics and academic integrity.

### EK8 – Cooperation and teamwork (PR_K03)

**2.0 – Fail:** The student does not participate adequately in seminar discussions or cooperate constructively with other participants, and does not demonstrate readiness to respect differing viewpoints or contribute to joint analysis.

**3.0 – Satisfactory:** The student participates in seminar activities to a limited extent and cooperates with others when prompted. Contributions to discussions are basic, and engagement with other participants' arguments is limited.

**3.5 – Satisfactory plus:** The student participates regularly in discussions, cooperates with other participants and generally respects differing viewpoints, although contributions to joint work are sometimes limited or insufficiently developed.

**4.0 – Good:** The student actively and constructively participates in seminar discussions, cooperates effectively with other participants, fulfils agreed tasks and contributes to the analysis of legal problems and evaluation of proposed solutions.

**4.5 – Good plus:** The student demonstrates a high level of engagement and cooperation, provides constructive feedback, considers alternative viewpoints and contributes meaningfully to the quality of group discussions and joint analysis.

**5.0 – Very good:** The student consistently demonstrates initiative, responsibility and constructive cooperation, actively supports academic discussion, provides thoughtful and well-founded feedback, respects differing viewpoints and significantly contributes to the collective analysis and evaluation of legal problems.

## 1. Basic Reading List

1. Radwański Z., Olejniczak A., *Civil Law – General Part*, 18th ed., Warsaw 2025.
2. Radwański Z., Olejniczak A., Grykiel J., *Law of Obligations – General Part*, Warsaw 2026.
3. Radwański Z., Panowicz-Lipska J., Lemkowski M., Mularski K., *Law of Obligations – Specific Part*, Warsaw 2026.

## 2. Supplementary Reading List

### A. Textbooks

1. Gniewek E., *Property Law*, Warsaw 2024.
2. Ignatowicz J., Stefaniuk K., *Property Law*, Warsaw 2022.
3. Smyczyński T., Andrzejewski M., *Family and Guardianship Law with Online Tests*, Warsaw 2026.
4. Skowrońska-Bocian E., *Inheritance Law with Online Tests*, Warsaw 2024.
5. Kawałko A., Witczak H., *Inheritance Law with Online Tests*, Warsaw 2025.
6. Wolter A., Ignatowicz J., Stefaniuk K., *Civil Law: An Outline of the General Part*, Warsaw 2018.

### B. Commentary on Codes

1. Gniewek E., Machnikowski P. (eds.), *Civil Code: Commentary*, Warsaw 2025.
2. Załucki M. (ed.), *Civil Code: Commentary*, Warsaw 2024.
3. Pietrzykowski K., Gajda J. (eds.), *Family and Guardianship Code: Commentary*, Warsaw 2025.
4. Załucki M. (ed.), *Family and Guardianship Code: Commentary*, Warsaw 2023.

### C. *System of Private Law*

1. Safjan M. (ed.), *System of Private Law*, Vol. 1: *Civil Law – General Part*, 2nd ed., Warsaw 2012.
2. Radwański Z., Olejniczak A. (eds.), *System of Private Law*, Vol. 2: *Civil Law – General Part*, Warsaw 2019.
3. Gniewek E. (ed.), *System of Private Law*, Vol. 3: *Property Law*, Warsaw 2020.
4. Gniewek E. (ed.), *System of Private Law*, Vol. 4: *Property Law*, Warsaw 2021.
5. Łętowska E. (ed.), *System of Private Law*, Vol. 5: *Law of Obligations – General Part*, Warsaw 2020.
6. Rajski J. (ed.), *System of Private Law*, Vol. 7: *Law of Obligations – Specific Part*, Warsaw 2018.
7. Panowicz-Lipska J. (ed.), *System of Private Law*, Vol. 8: *Law of Obligations – Specific Part*, Warsaw 2011.
8. Kordasiewicz B. (ed.), *System of Private Law*,

Additional information (registration calendar, class conductors, localization and schedules of classes), might be available in the USOSweb system:

• Description of WP-PRZ-SEM-ŁŻ-V in USOSweb