Ethical standards

The Editorial Board of Transformation of Private Law Journal upholds academic integrity and other values shared by the academic community and therefore adopts the following ethical standards.

The Editorial Board:

1. Upholds the principle of scholarly integrity by reviewing compliance with accepted standards on an ongoing basis, documenting violations and drawing appropriate consequences.
2. Ensures that the person presenting the results of his/her work in the form of a submitted text is the real author of that text, not accepting the practices of:
a) ghostwriting, which includes cases where someone has made a significant contribution to the publication without disclosing his/her participation as one of the authors or without mentioning his/her role in the acknowledgements included in the publication.
b) guest authorship (honorary authorship), which includes cases where the author's contribution is negligible or has not taken place at all, but is nevertheless the author/co-author of the publication.
3. Ensures that the published texts make an authorial contribution to science, are original, authored only by the persons indicated as authors and have not been previously published, accepted for publication or submitted for publication. The text may be subject to checking with anti-plagiarism software.
4. Requires authors to disclose the contribution of individual authors to the publication (including their affiliations and contributions, i.e. who authored the concept, assumptions, methods, protocol, etc. used in the preparation of the publication), with the primary responsibility resting with the author submitting the manuscript.
5. Decides whether a manuscript should be accepted for publication solely on the basis of the merits of the submitted manuscript, its scientific merit, its contribution to science and its originality. Criteria such as gender, religion, origin, nationality or political beliefs of the authors cannot be used as criteria for acceptance.
6. Communicates to the authors the decision to accept or refuse to accept the text for publication, giving reasons for the decision to refuse to accept the text for publication.
7. Treats texts submitted to the Journal as confidential documents and does not provide unauthorised persons with any information about the works submitted for publication and the publication process. Only the authors themselves, selected reviewers, authorised editors and the publisher are authorised to have this information.
8. Shall not appoint as reviewers persons who may have a conflict of interest, understood as remaining in a relationship of subordination or superiority with the author of a given text or in other direct personal or professional relations that could result in a lack of impartiality at the stage of reviewing the text.
9. Ensures that the author does not know the identity of the reviewers and that, until publication, the author's identity is not known to any of the reviewers.
10. In the event that violations in the above regard are detected, the editorial board shall inform the author and, in the event that, after informing the author, it does not immediately obtain a plausible explanation from the author that there have been no violations, it shall notify the relevant entities, including the relevant law enforcement authorities and the disciplinary authorities of the academic unit.
11. In the event that, despite the presentation of an explanation in accordance with paragraph 10, a finding of infringement is made, it shall withdraw the text from publication, discontinuing its publication if it has not yet been published, and if the text has been published, it shall include a notice of the found infringement. It shall inform the author of the withdrawal of the text from publication, giving reasons for the decision.
12. Where appropriate, the editorial board, shall place a correction, explanation or apology on the journal page and in the journal issue.

The author:

1. By submitting a text for publication, undertakes to respect the applicable rules of publishing ethics.
2. Along with the submission of the text, shall provide information that the text is original, is authored solely by the persons indicated as authors and has not been previously published, accepted for publication or submitted for publication, and the contribution of the individual authors to the publication (including their affiliations and contributions, i.e. who is the author of the concept, assumptions, methods, protocol, etc. used in the preparation of the publication), with the primary responsibility of the author submitting the manuscript.
3. When submitting a manuscript, it is the author's responsibility to disclose the sources of funding for the publication, contributions from scientific research institutions, associations and others (financial disclosure).
4. Submits only the text of his/her own authorship, which has the character of a scientific text, and to the extent that he/she refers to the research of others, he/she uses appropriate designations, including footnotes and citations in accordance with the journal's editorial policy.
5. Has the right to respond to the position expressed in the review, while retaining the freedom to take the reviewer's comments into account. However, failure to take the reviewer's comments into account may be grounds for refusal to publish the text.
6. Until publication, he has the right to withdraw an article submitted to the Journal.
7. Shall immediately inform the editors if he/she discovers an error in his/her text, including a violation of the rules of publishing ethics, and shall correct the text accordingly so that it remains in accordance with the rules in force.
8. Shall be obliged to provide all explanations if the editorial board finds a violation of the rules of publishing ethics.

The reviewer:

1. Shall review the text solely on the basis of the merits of the submitted text, its scientific merit, contribution to science and originality. A negative review cannot be based solely on the adoption of a different view from that of the reviewer, if it is adequately justified. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.
2. Produces the review within the agreed deadline. If for some reason they are unable to meet the deadline or undertake the review, they shall inform the new editor without delay, setting a new deadline if necessary.
3. Produce the review independently and honestly, making a careful assessment of the submitted text. The review should be written with respect for the principles of personal culture.
4. When drafting the review, justifies its outcome. If necessary, presenting and proposing necessary changes and corrections to the text that will improve its scientific quality.
5. Shall be obliged to maintain confidentiality, which means that the reviewer does not present the text of the reviewed article or the content of the review to unauthorised persons.
6. Shall be obliged to inform the editorial board of any perceived sign of scientific dishonesty or violation of the accepted principles of publishing ethics.
7. Is prohibited to use the text, the ideas and concepts expressed therein for his own purposes or benefit, in particular by drawing up a future paper based on them. If the editors of the Journal become aware of such a violation from any source, they will notify the appropriate entities, including the relevant law enforcement authorities and the disciplinary authorities of the academic unit.

Any disputes relating to the publication of the Journal should in the first instance be resolved amicably.

Presented rules have been designed based in particular on:

a) COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors https://publicationethics.org/core-practices
b) rules of Committee on Publication Ethics, in particular Principles of Transparency and Best Practices in Scholarly Publishing, available at https://www.oaspa.org/news/principles-of-transparency-and-best-practice-in-scholarly-publishing/
c) a letter written by Prof. Maciej Banach, Under-Secretary of State of Ministry of Science and Higher Education of Poland to editors-in-chief and publishers of scientific journals, 24 November 2011
d) rules of review process adopted during the Editorial Board meeting on 19 January 2012, in force since 15 February 2012.