III SPP 110/05
AI generated
Appeal court's mandatory stay due to bankruptcy does not constitute procedural delay or violate rights.
Poland (PL)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Supreme Court dismissed Antoniego B.'s complaint alleging procedural delay in his appeal against Wandę G. The appellant argued that the appellate court's mandatory stay regarding the debtor's bankruptcy proceedings caused unjustified delay and asset dissipation. The court ruled that such a stay is legally required when the debt enters the bankruptcy estate and does not violate the right to a timely trial.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 174 § 1 pkt 4 k.p.c.; Art. 12 ust. 1 ustawy o skardze na naruszenie prawa strony do rozpoznania sprawy w postępowaniu sądowym bez nieuzasadnionej zwłoki: A mandatory stay of proceedings due to bankruptcy does not constitute procedural delay or violate the right to a trial without unjustified delay.
Keywords
AI generated
procedural delay
mandatory stay
bankruptcy proceedings
appellate court
unjustified delay
Cited Legislation
AI generatedArt. 174 § 1 pkt 4 k.p.c.
Art. 12 ust. 1 ustawy z dnia 17 czerwca 2004 r. o skardze na naruszenie prawa strony do rozpoznania sprawy w postępowaniu sądowym bez nieuzasadnionej zwłoki
art. 174 § 1 pkt 4 k.p.c
art. 174 pkt 4 k.p.c