Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
III CZ 81/25 AI generated

Supreme Court corrects a lower court order by adding missing text to the judgment reference.

Case Number III CZ 81/25
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Poland (PL)
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court issued a ruling to correct an obvious inaccuracy in a previous order regarding the judgment reference. The plaintiff, J.H., sought payment from a bank, while the lower court's order mistakenly omitted the specific point number in its citation. The court allowed the correction by inserting the words 'in point 3' after the word 'judgment' to ensure the document accurately reflects the legal basis.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

s. 24 ust. 1 k.p.k.; The Supreme Court may correct an obvious inaccuracy in a lower court's order when the error concerns the reference to the judgment, provided the correction clarifies the intended legal basis without altering the substantive outcome.

Keywords

AI generated
obvious inaccuracy judgment reference correction of order civil procedure sentencing error Supreme Court ruling procedural correction

Cited Legislation

AI generated
s. 24 ust. 1 k.p.k.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

III CZ 81/25 POSTANOWIENIE 12 czerwca 2025 r.Sąd Najwyższy w Izbie Cywilnej w składzie: SSN Marta Romańska na posiedzeniu niejawnym 12 czerwca 2025 r. w Warszawie‎w sprawie z powództwa J.H.‎przeciwko Bankowi spółce akcyjnej w G.‎o zapłatę, z urzędu prostuje oczywistą niedokładność w sentencji postanowienia z 30 maja 2025 r. w ten sposób, że po słowie wyrok dodaje słowa "w pkt 3". (R.N.)[a.ł] ‎