Supreme Court dismisses appeal filed late, ruling that applying for a court-appointed lawyer does not extend the statutory appeal period.
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Supreme Court dismissed the appellant's cassation appeal filed in January 1997, which was submitted well after the one-month deadline expired in August 1996. The appellant had requested a court-appointed lawyer after the deadline passed, arguing this should have extended the time limit for filing the appeal. The court held that the delivery of the court's decision to the party personally legally triggered the appeal period, and subsequent actions like requesting a lawyer do not interrupt or extend this statutory timeframe.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 393 § 4 KPC; Art. 393 § 5 KPC; Art. 393 § 8 KPC: The delivery of a final decision to the party personally initiates the appeal period, and a subsequent request for a court-appointed lawyer does not extend or interrupt this statutory time limit.