Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
II S 19/18 AI generated

Court dismisses appeal letter as ineffective due to non-payment and failure to cure procedural defect within deadline.

Case Number II S 19/18
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Poland (PL)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court declared the defendant's appeal letter ineffective because it was not paid and the procedural defect was not cured within the specified timeframe. The defendant submitted a complaint regarding delays, but failed to settle the associated fee despite a warning from the Court of Appeal. Consequently, the letter was deemed legally void for non-compliance with mandatory procedural requirements.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 120 § 2 k.p.k.; A procedural document submitted by a convicted person is ineffective if the required fee is not paid and the defect is not remedied within the prescribed period.

Keywords

AI generated
ineffective procedural document non-payment of fees procedural defect curing defect deadline criminal procedure law court regulation failure to comply

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 120 § 2 k.p.k.
H., z a r z ą d z a – na podstawie art. 120 § 2 k.p.k. uznać za bezskuteczne pismo skazanego M.
art. 120 § 2 k.p.k
H., z a r z ą d z a – na podstawie art. 120 § 2 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

Sygnatura akt II S 19/18 ZARZĄDZENIE z dnia 18 maja 2018 roku. S.S.A. Piotr Kaczmarek w sprawie skazanego M. H., z a r z ą d z a – na podstawie art. 120 § 2 k.p.k. uznać za bezskuteczne pismo skazanego M. H., sporządzone 1 lutego 2018 roku, zawierające skargę na naruszenie prawa strony do rozpoznania sprawy bez nieuzasadnionej zwłoki, wobec nieopłacenia tej skargi przez skazanego w terminie wskazanym w wezwaniu do usunięcia braku z dnia 25 kwietnia 2018 roku i pomimo pouczenia skazanego przez Sąd Apelacyjny we Wrocławiu o skutkach nieuzupełnienia tego braku w terminie.