Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
BS-2809/2009-OLR ECLI:DK:OLR:2022:BS0000004637 AI generated

Court allows appeal reinstatement due to lawyer error causing late filing within statutory grace period.

Case Number BS-2809/2009-OLR
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Denmark (DK)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court reinstated the appeal proceedings after the appellant's lawyer failed to file documents within the strict deadline. Although the initial submission was late, the court found the delay resulted solely from the lawyer's mistake rather than the appellant's fault. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion under the relevant statute to extend the timeline and allow the appeal to proceed.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Retsplejelovens § 372, stk. 3; If a party's failure to meet a filing deadline is caused by the party's own legal representative's error, the court may reinstate the proceedings if the appeal is submitted within the statutory grace period following the rejection.

Keywords

AI generated
legal representative error filing deadline extension statutory grace period appeal reinstatement court discretion procedural remedy lawyer negligence

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Retsplejelovens § 372, stk. 3
retsplejelovens § 372, stk. 3
AI generated
SS-812/2009-VLR
Appeal dismissed because no original written appeal was submitted, only an email and fax.
SKS-1886/2009-HIL
Court dismisses lawsuit filed after bankruptcy court deadline expires, citing lack of authority to proceed.
BS-8743/2020-OLR
Appeal dismissed because lawyer without court representation filed the appeal filing electronically.
BS-1923/2016-OLR
Appeal allowed because digital filing after office hours counts as timely under new statute.
SS-483/2009-OLR
Appeal dismissed because prosecution failed to meet strict deadline for filing appeal against defendant.

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

Kendelse om fortsat behandling af ankesag efter afvisning, jf. retsplejelovens § 372, stk. 3

[DOKUMENT] Retsbog med kendelse (2 sider) UDSKRIFT AF ØSTRE LANDSRETS RETSBOG ____________

Den 14. juni 2010 satte Østre Landsret retten, i retsbygningen, Bredgade 59, København.

Som dommere fungerede landsdommerne Ole Græsbøll Olesen, Karsten Bo Knudsen og Anne Louise Bormann, førstnævnte som rettens formand.

Som protokolfører fungerede Medarbejder ved retten.

Der foretoges

11. afd. a.s. nr. B-2809-09: 3F som mandatar for Appellant, tidligere Sagsøger (advokat Rune Asmussen) mod Museum Lolland Falster tidl. Lolland-Falsters Stiftsmuseum (advokat Lonnie Nielsen)

Ingen var mødt eller indkaldt.

Der fremlagdes breve af 1. og 7. juni 2010 fra advokat Rune Asmussen samt telefaxbrev af 7. juni 2010 fra advokat Lonnie Nielsen.

Efter votering afsagdes sålydende

kendelse:

Da det må lægges til grund, at overskridelsen af fristen for indlevering af påstandsdoku-ment skyldes en fejl fra appellantens advokat, og da ankestævningen er indleveret til lands-retten inden 2 uger efter, at sagen blev afvist, jf. retsplejelovens § 372, stk. 3,

bestemmes:

Appellantens anmodning om, at sagen på ny tages under behandling, tages til følge.

Retten hævet.

(Sign.)