II PK 295/10
AI generated
Supreme Court dismissed union's appeal, ruling union scope expansion requires active committee decision, not automatic effect.
Poland (PL)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Supreme Court dismissed the union's cassation appeal regarding the scope of its organizational action. The lower court had rejected the plaintiff's claim that the union's structure did not cover the new employer, noting the union committee had actively decided to expand its scope. The court held that statutory provisions merely define the procedure for such expansion, which requires a specific decision by the competent committee within 30 days rather than occurring automatically.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 189 k.p.c.; The scope of action of a trade union organization is not established automatically by the employment of former members at a new employer but requires a specific decision by the competent committee within the statutory period.
Keywords
AI generated
trade union scope
organizational action
cassation appeal
committee decision
labor law procedure
union membership
employer liability
Cited Legislation
AI generatedArt. 189 k.p.c.
§ 11 ust. 1 Statutu NSZZ Solidarność
§ 19 ust. 3 i 4 Statutu NSZZ Solidarność
art. 398 § 14 k.p.c.
art. 189 k.p.c
art. 23¹ k.p
art. 17 k.p.c
art. 365 § 1 k.p.c
art. 3 k.p
art. 17 pkt 1 k.p.c
Cited Case Law
AI generatedII PK 274/04
Supreme Court voids appeal judgment for lack of valid power of attorney and remands case.
I PK 124/06
Supreme Court dismissed cassation appeal as alleged procedural defects did not affect plaintiff's rights.
III CSK 193/06
Trademark infringement dismissed; distinct packaging and product classification prevent consumer confusion despite shared word elements.
III CK 323/04
Supreme Court allows appeal against default judgment for construction work, citing procedural errors and missing evidence.
I CK 194/05
Supreme Court dismisses appeal; arbitration clause valid despite agent's lack of specific authority.
III CK 328/05
Supreme Court dismisses appeal regarding partner's liability for company funds, citing procedural limits and breach of duty.