III AO 24/98
AI generated
Supreme Court dismissed appeal for retrial due to lack of statutory grounds and failure to notify court of new counsel.
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Supreme Court rejected the appellant's request for a retrial, ruling that the statutory grounds for such a remedy were not met. The appellant argued that the court failed to notify them of the hearing because their new lawyer had not been properly registered, despite the previous lawyer's mandate covering the Supreme Court proceedings. The court determined that the original lawyer's mandate remained valid and that the appellant failed to prove the new lawyer's registration according to procedural requirements.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedart. 401 pkt 2 KPC; art. 94 § 1 KPC: An appeal for retrial is inadmissible if the party was not properly represented, as the court was notified of the lawyer whose mandate the party had revoked without informing the court.
Keywords
AI generated
appeal for retrial
representation mandate
court notification
procedural rights
Supreme Court
Cited Legislation
AI generatedart. 401 pkt 2 KPC
art. 94 § 1 KPC
art. 89 § 1 KPC