The article presents resolutions and rulings of the Supreme Court Criminal Chamber adopted as a result of deciding prejudicial issues requiring fundamental interpretation of statutes, raising doubts concerning the interpretation of the provisions which are grounds for a judgment issued or which raised discrepancies in their interpretation. These concern: admissibility of a complaint about a court’s ruling on lack of competence (Article 35 § 3 CPC); the requirements for appeal courts for asking the Supreme Court prejudicial questions concerning issues that need fundamental interpretation of a statute (Article 441 § 1 CPC); the scope of the power of pardon (Article 139 Constitution of the Republic of Poland and Article 560 CPC) and the scope of application of the Criminal Procedure Code in disciplinary proceedings against attorneys-at-law (Article 741 para. 1 Act on attorneys-at-law). Assessing the opinions expressed in those judgments, the author reviews statements made on those issues in the legal doctrine and judicature and adds his own thoughts to the quoted arguments.