Supreme Court dismissed pension appeal; omitting proven contribution periods from verdict sentence does not violate procedural law.
Poland (PL)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Supreme Court dismissed the pension authority's cassation appeal against a court ruling granting the applicant an old-age pension. The authority argued that the lower court violated procedural rules by failing to explicitly list the proven contribution and non-contribution periods in the verdict's operative part. The court held that such omission does not constitute a legal violation because the facts were established in the reasoning, and the authority is bound by the verdict to grant the pension while retaining the flexibility to adjust the calculation later.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 325 k.p.c.; Art. 328 § 2 k.p.c.; Art. 384 k.p.c.; Art. 386 § 1, 4 k.p.c.; Art. 398 § 14 k.p.c.: Omitting the specific duration of proven contribution and non-contribution periods from the operative part of a verdict granting a pension right does not violate Art. 325 k.p.c., as the facts are established in the reasoning and the authority remains bound by the verdict to grant the benefit.