II UZ 68/03 AI generated

Appeal to Ombudsman does not suspend appeal deadline nor exempt from monthly filing obligation.

Case Number II UZ 68/03

Court / Authority Sąd Najwyższy

Jurisdiction

Poland (PL)

Decision Date 2003-08-14

Outcome Dismissed

Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal against the appellate court's decision to reject the request to restore the appeal deadline. The applicant sought to extend the deadline by submitting a request to the Ombudsman for Citizens' Rights, but the court found this action did not suspend the monthly filing period. The court ruled that relying on the Ombudsman's intervention does not excuse a party from meeting statutory deadlines unless they can prove non-faultful delay, which was not established here.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 3934 § 2 k.p.c.; Art. 168 § 1, 2 k.p.c.; Art. 392 § 1 k.p.c.; The submission of a request to the Ombudsman for Citizens' Rights does not suspend the deadline for filing an appeal nor exempt the party from the obligation to observe the monthly appeal deadline.

Keywords

AI generated

Ombudsman request appeal deadline monthly filing period faultful delay civil procedure code

Cited Legislation

AI generated

Art. 3934 § 2 k.p.c.

Art. 168 § 1 k.p.c.

Art. 168 § 2 k.p.c.

Art. 392 § 1 k.p.c.

Art. 385 k.p.c.

Art. 39319 k.p.c.

art. 3934 § 2 k.p.c

art. 168 § 2 k.p.c

art.168 § 1 k.p.c

art. 22 k.p.c

Appeal to Ombudsman does not suspend appeal deadline nor exempt from monthly filing obligation.

Legislator summary

Legislator headnote

Keywords

Cited Legislation

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Full text