III SO 19/05
AI generated
Appeal against delay complaint dismissed as inadmissible because delay proceedings are incidental and final.
Poland (PL)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Supreme Court dismissed the appellant's appeal regarding the length of proceedings because the delay complaint was an incidental procedural step. The appellant argued for review of the first-instance court's decision, but the court found the delay proceeding was merely a remedy within the main case. Consequently, the appeal was rejected as inadmissible since the delay complaint is final and cannot be appealed further.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedUstawa o skardze na naruszenie prawa strony do rozpoznania sprawy w postępowaniu sądowym bez nieuzasadnionej zwłoki art. 8 ust. 2; Skarga na przewlekłość postępowania jest środkiem incydentalnym i zażaleniem, którego postanowienia są ostateczne i nie podlegają dalszemu zaskarżeniu.
Keywords
AI generated
incidental proceedings
length of proceedings
inadmissible appeal
finality of decision
civil procedure code
Cited Legislation
AI generatedart. 8 ust. 2 of the Act of 17 June 2004 on complaints against the right of a party to have a case heard without undue delay
art. 367 of the Code of Civil Procedure
art. 394 of the Code of Civil Procedure
art. 398 of the Code of Civil Procedure
art. 373 of the Code of Civil Procedure
art. 367 k.p.c
art. 394 k.p.c
art. 3941 § 1 k.p.c
art. 39821 k.p.c