Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
II Ka 216/18 AI generated

Court partially allowed appeal by reducing court costs for a fine of warning due to incorrect fee calculation.

Case Number II Ka 216/18
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Poland (PL)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Court of Appeal partially upheld the first-instance judgment against D. G., who was convicted of jaywalking and fined with a warning. The defense argued the penalty was disproportionate and that the court failed to consider the public nature of the crossing, while the prosecution sought to maintain the conviction. The court rejected the claim of disproportionality but corrected the procedural error regarding court fees, reducing the fine from 130 to 100 zloty and ordering the appellant to pay 50 zloty for the appeal.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 97 kw; Art. 13 ust. 1 Prawo o ruchu drogowym; Art. 437 § 1, 2 k.p.k.; Art. 438 pkt 2 k.p.k.; Art. 109 § 2 k.p.w.: The court may reduce court costs if the first-instance judgment incorrectly calculated fees, but it cannot reduce the substantive penalty if the conviction is legally sound.

Keywords

AI generated
jaywalking fine of warning court costs reduction proportionality principle appeal procedure

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 97 kw
Art. 13 ust. 1 Prawo o ruchu drogowym
Art. 437 § 1 i 2 k.p.k.
Art. 438 pkt 2 k.p.k.
Art. 109 § 2 k.p.w.
Art. 636 § 1 k.p.k.
Art. 119 k.p.w.
§ 4 Rozporządzenia Ministra Sprawiedliwości z dnia 22 grudnia 2017 r.

Cited Case Law

AI generated
OSNPG 1974 / 3-4 / 51
OSNPK 1995 / 6 / 18
AI generated
II K 773/16
Court conditionally dismissed criminal charges for negligent traffic accident with one-year probation and compensation.
IX W 3938/16
Court convicts defendant for parking on a pedestrian crossing, imposing a fine under traffic law.
XI W 2869/15
Court convicted driver of traffic offense for endangering safety by overtaking stopped vehicle and failing to yield to pedestrians.
VII W 135/22
Court upheld traffic fine for failing to yield to pedestrian entering crosswalk, rejecting argument that foot placement matters.
IV W 377/14
Court acquits defendant of traffic violation for overtaking near pedestrian crossing due to lack of evidence of actual crossing. Defendant argued speed limit breach but charge was limited to overtaking rule.

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