Legislator Case Law & Legislation
I PZP 1/08 AI generated

Social benefit for miners on leave before 2001 is not reduced by employee-paid social security contributions.

Case Number I PZP 1/08
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Poland (PL)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court dismissed the request for a ruling on whether social benefits for miners on leave before February 8, 2001, should be reduced by employee-paid social security contributions. The plaintiff argued that the 2001 amendment to the Coal Mining Adaptation Act retroactively lowered benefit calculations, while the defendant contended the law only applied prospectively. The court ruled that the lower court's question exceeded its jurisdiction because the statutory definition of the benefit was already established prior to the amendment, making the legal issue unnecessary for the final judgment.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 2 pkt 10 ustawy o dostosowaniu górnictwa; Art. 390 k.p.c.: The Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to rule on the retroactive application of a new statutory definition of social benefits for miners on leave if the benefit's calculation basis was already fixed by law prior to the amendment's entry into force.

Keywords

AI generated
social security contributions mining leave benefits retroactive application statutory definition jurisdictional limitation coal mining adaptation employee-paid deductions

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 2 pkt 10 ustawy z dnia 26 listopada 1998 r. o dostosowaniu górnictwa węgla kamiennego do funkcjonowania w warunkach gospodarki rynkowej oraz szczególnych uprawnieniach i zadaniach gmin górniczych
art. 22 ust. 1 i 2 tej ustawy
art. 390 k.p.c.
art. 390 § 1 k.p.c
art. 390 k.p.c

Cited Case Law

AI generated
uchwała składu siedmiu sędziów Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 24 kwietnia 2002 r., III ZP 33/01
wyrok z 22 czerwca 2005 r., I PK 292/04
wyrok z 24 stycznia 2006 r., I PK 110/05
I PK 292/04
Collective agreements cannot override statutory mining leave bonuses; changes require employee consent or termination notice.
I PK 110/05

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text