Court partially allowed appeal, finding malicious intent only in one police call while dismissing others.
Poland (PL)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe appellate court partially upheld the first-instance verdict against the defendant, K. G., who was charged with maliciously disturbing peace under Article 107 of the Penal Code. The defendant argued that police interventions on two occasions were based on misunderstandings regarding his visitation rights with his child, rather than malicious intent to harass the mother. The court agreed that the first two calls lacked the requisite malicious intent because the defendant genuinely believed he was enforcing his court-ordered visitation rights, but found the third call on August 4, 2012, to be maliciously intended to harass the victim.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 107 k.k.; The court established that for a malicious disturbance of peace to constitute a crime, the actor must have a specific intent to harass; if the actor acts based on a genuine, albeit mistaken, belief in their legal right to act, the malicious intent element is missing, though a separate call made with clear intent to harass satisfies the charge.