The text presents the issue of the Supreme Court’s functions from the perspective of civil law countries. The author argues that the division into cassation, revision and appeal is not an adequate point of reference enabling to define those functions. The author asserts that the most important criterion is whether the Supreme Court acts overwhelmingly in public or private interest. The assessment of that criterion should be made on the basis of the methods of selection of cases by the Supreme Court. What is essential is whether the selection is based on public aims or whether it simply aims at solving a given case accurately. It may be argued that as a result of reforms introduced in the last few years, the majorityof civil law countries have focusedon the implementation of the public rather than private functions. The author concludes that the public function of supreme courts is of a completely different significance than in the times of socialism. The public interest is combined with private interest as it refers to the situation of parties – not parties to the specific proceedings, but all parties which are going to engage in litigation in the future.