The theory of criminal law recommends several solutions regarding cases in which a single act violates more than one criminal provision, e.g., an act fulfils at the same time elements of definitions of two or more offences. One of them is the concept of (ideal) concurrence of offences, according to which concept multiple convictions occur. The author of the article presents arguments: supporting the view that analytical methods known as the principles of: speciality (lex specialis derogat legi generali), consumption (lex consumens derogat legi consumptae) and subsidiarity (lex primaria derogat legi subsidiariae) also apply within this concept, and broadly criticizing the contrary view as supported by the Polish Supreme Court decision of January 24, 2013 in a seven Judge panel, I KZP 19/12. The main thesis presented by the author is that multiple convictions based on the same facts should be excluded, if application of the principles of: speciality, consumption and/or subsidiarity allows for a reduction of the set of “competing” criminal provisions to only one of them prevailing over others (appear ideal concurrence of offences).