Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
II URN 24/94 AI generated

Supreme Court dismissed extraordinary review for not violating procedural law regarding conflicting expert medical opinions on disability date.

Case Number II URN 24/94
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Poland (PL)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court dismissed the extraordinary review filed by a railway employee seeking disability pension benefits. The lower appellate court had reversed a first-instance decision by re-evaluating medical records and expert opinions to establish a different date for the onset of disability than the court-appointed expert had suggested. The court ruled that the appellate court's assessment of the documentary evidence did not constitute a flagrant violation of procedural law, even though it differed from the expert's specific opinion on the disability's origin.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 233 § 1 k.p.c.; Art. 477 § 4 k.p.c.; Art. 421 § 1 k.p.c.: An appellate court's evaluation of documentary evidence and expert opinions to determine the date of disability onset, differing from a court-appointed expert's opinion, does not amount to a flagrant violation of procedural law justifying an extraordinary review.

Keywords

AI generated
extraordinary review dismissal disability pension entitlement expert opinion evaluation procedural law violation medical evidence assessment

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 233 § 1 k.p.c.
Art. 477 § 4 k.p.c.
Art. 421 § 1 k.p.c.
Art. 39 of the Act on Pension Provision for Railway Employees and Their Families
Art. 24 § 1 of the Act on Pension Provision for Employees and Their Families
art. 233 § 1 k.p.c
art. 421 § 1 k.p.c

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