Supreme Court dismisses invalidity claim when verdict follows a closed hearing without reopening order.
Poland (PL)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Supreme Court dismissed the legal question regarding whether a verdict rendered after a closed hearing without a formal reopening order constitutes a procedural invalidity. The lower court raised doubts because the hearing was closed, yet the judge who presided over the closed session also issued the verdict without a new opening decision. The Supreme Court ruled that since the parties were properly notified and the second hearing proceeded correctly, the formal defect regarding the reopening did not affect the rights of the parties or the outcome of the proceedings.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedart. 379 pkt 4 k.p.c.; art. 323 k.p.c.; art. 225 k.p.c.; art. 148 § 1 k.p.c.; art. 390 § 1 k.p.c.: A formal defect in the reopening of a previously closed hearing does not render the proceedings invalid if the subsequent hearing was conducted with proper notice and the verdict was issued by the court that presided over the immediately preceding closed hearing.