Legislator Case Law & Legislation
III SO 20/10 AI generated

Appeal against civil procedure costs ruling in delay complaint proceedings is inadmissible under Polish law.

Case Number III SO 20/10
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Poland (PL)
Decision Date
Outcome Inadmissible

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court dismissed the appellant's appeal regarding the refusal to supplement a court order with higher legal representation costs. The lower court denied the request because the specific fee schedule for delay complaints did not cover the higher amount claimed, and the Supreme Court agreed that such incidental cost rulings are not subject to appeal in this non-two-instance procedure. Consequently, the appeal was declared inadmissible as it lacked a proper legal basis for review.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 3941 § 1 pkt 2 k.p.c.; Art. 39821 k.p.c.; Art. 373 k.p.c.: An appeal to the Supreme Court against a court order regarding legal representation costs in proceedings for a complaint against procedural delay is inadmissible because such proceedings do not constitute a two-instance trial.

Keywords

AI generated
procedural delay complaint legal representation costs inadmissible appeal two-instance procedure incidental cost ruling Supreme Court jurisdiction civil procedure code

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 3941 § 1 pkt 2 k.p.c.
Art. 39821 k.p.c.
Art. 373 k.p.c.
art. 3941 k.p.c
art. 351 k.p.c
art. 361 k.p.c
art. 3941 § 2 k.p.c
art. 394 k.p.c
art. 3941 § 1 pkt 2 k.p.c
art. 3941 § 3 k.p.c

Cited Case Law

AI generated
Uchwała Sądu Najwyższego z 23 marca 2006 r., III SPZP 3/05
Uchwała Sądu Najwyższego z 21 czerwca 2006 r., III SPZP 1/06
Postanowienie z 17 listopada 2009 r., III CZ 53/09

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