II UKN 357/98
KI-generiert
Supreme Court quashes pension court ruling for failing to order expert opinion on hazardous work conditions.
Polen (PL)
Legislator-Zusammenfassung
KI-generiertThe Supreme Court quashed the lower court's dismissal of Adam M.'s appeal regarding early pension rights due to hazardous work conditions. The lower court failed to consider witness testimony and relevant regulations defining hazardous work in the chemical printing industry. Consequently, the Supreme Court ordered the case remitted for a new trial where an expert opinion must be obtained to verify the hazardous nature of the employment.
Legislator-Regeste
KI-generiertArt. 53 ust. 2 ustawy o zaopatrzeniu emerytalnym pracowników i ich rodzin; Art. 393 § 1 KPC: Evidence of hazardous work conditions may be proven by all means, including expert opinions, and failure to obtain such evidence when facts are unclear constitutes a procedural error affecting the outcome.
Schlagwörter
KI-generiert
early pension rights
hazardous work conditions
expert opinion requirement
procedural error
remittal for retrial
chemical industry employment
witness testimony admissibility
Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen
KI-generiertArt. 53 ust. 2 ustawy o zaopatrzeniu emerytalnym pracowników i ich rodzin
Art. 224 § 1 KPC
Art. 227 KPC
Art. 233 § 1 KPC
Art. 235 zdanie pierwsze KPC
Art. 236 KPC
Art. 244 KPC
Art. 328 § 2 KPC
Art. 477 § 1 KPC
Art. 393 § 1 KPC