II UKN 112/01
AI generated
Supreme Court quashes appeal judgment for failure to address conflicting expert medical opinions in work disability case.
Poland (PL)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Supreme Court quashed the appellate court's judgment and remanded the case for a new trial due to procedural errors. The lower court relied on one expert opinion while ignoring a contradictory one without explaining why the first was rejected. The court held that failing to address conflicting expert views violates the duty to evaluate evidence comprehensively and requires a third opinion when disagreements exist.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 233 § 1 KPC; Art. 286 KPC; Art. 328 § 2 KPC; Art. 393 § 1 KPC: When conflicting expert opinions exist, a court must address both and provide a third opinion if necessary; failure to do so violates the duty of comprehensive evidence evaluation.
Keywords
AI generated
conflicting expert opinions
work disability pension
comprehensive evidence evaluation
medical expert assessment
procedural error in judgment
remittal for retrial
duty to explain evidence
Cited Legislation
AI generatedArt. 233 § 1 KPC
Art. 286 KPC
Art. 328 § 2 KPC
Art. 393 § 1 KPC
Art. 78 of the Act on Pension Provision for Employees and Their Families