This paper presents an outline of the title issue together with the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court regarding the resolution of legal questions that raise serious doubts. Established in Art. 390 § 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure the institution of legal questions
– as a derogation from the constitutional principle of judicial independence of judges, who in the exercise of their office are subject only to the Constitution of the Republic of Poland and laws – should be applied only when there is a real need to clarify serious
legal doubts of decisive importance for the resolution of the case, remaining with this decision in the causal relationship. In the event of ordinary interpretation doubts, the appellate court should resolve them on its own, using the knowledge provided by the
provisions themselves and their understanding in previous case law and legal science. Presenting a legal issue that raises serious doubts in the case of various interpretations of the same provision appearing in case law will be used in a situation where, in the opinion of the second-instance court, the adoption of each of these interpretations is supported by important legal arguments presented by this court, and the choice of the appropriate interpretation is not explained either the current position of the judiciary or the legal doctrine. The subject of a legal question submitted for resolution should be a legal issue that raises truly serious doubts. If ordinary doubts arise, the appellate court should resolve them on its own. However, neither the gravity of the problem contained in it nor the discrepancies in the case law and literature as to how to solve it constitute an independent basis for submitting a legal question to the Supreme Court.