In this commentary, the view is presented that in the light of Article 365(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure it is not enough to refer only to the operative part of the judgment, but it is always necessary to also read the justification of the determination. The author points out that without familiarity with the justification of the judgment, and in the absence of a detailed analysis of the reasons that led to the issue of the judgment, it is impossible to determine the scope of res judicata and the scope of the judgment’s binding force. Only a detailed analysis of the reasons for the determination in the judgment and consideration of whether and to what extent a given judgment determines a given relationship in a binding (precedent-setting) manner enables delineating the scope of its binding force for the parties, courts and other authorities. However, it is not always fully possible when applying the principle of exclusive, literal binding only by the determination contained in the operative part of the judgment. This is an important problem due to the new trend in case law, whereby the binding force of a valid judgment is limited to the literal wording of the operative part of the judgment. If this new line of case law continues, in the author’s opinion, it may even limit the significance of Article 365(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The commentary is an approving one.