I PZ 6/06
AI generated
Supreme Court held that appeal on second-instance ruling follows Art. 394 § 3 CPC, not Art. 368 § 1. Appeal was allowed as it met formal requirements.
Poland (PL)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Supreme Court set aside the District Court's dismissal of an appeal lodged by the defendant's lawyer. The lower court had rejected the appeal because it allegedly lacked specific structural elements required by Article 368 § 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Supreme Court ruled that appeals against second-instance rulings must instead comply with Article 394 § 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which the appellant's letter satisfied.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 394 § 3 k.p.c.; Art. 368 § 1 k.p.c. - Appeals against second-instance rulings must comply with the formal requirements of Article 394 § 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, not Article 368 § 1.
Keywords
AI generated
appeal against second instance
structural defects
Code of Civil Procedure
formal requirements
dismissal of appeal
Cited Legislation
AI generatedArt. 394 § 3 k.p.c.
Art. 368 § 1 pkt 1-3 i pkt 5 k.p.c.
Art. 391 § 1 zdanie pierwsze k.p.c.
Art. 397 § 2 k.p.c.
Art. 3701 k.p.c.
Art. 39821 k.p.c.
Art. 386 § 1 k.p.c.
art. 394 § 3 k.p.c
art. 3941 § 3 k.p.c
art. 387 § 3 k.p.c