Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
II UZ 62/11 AI generated

Supreme Court quashes appeal decision rejecting request for reasoned judgment due to missed deadline.

Case Number II UZ 62/11
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Poland (PL)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court quashed the appellate court's decision rejecting the applicant's request for a reasoned judgment and service of the verdict. The applicant argued that the deadline for filing an appeal should only begin after the court addressed the request to restore the missed deadline for the reasoned judgment. The court held that the appellate court failed to evaluate whether the missed deadline was caused by the applicant's fault, violating the duty of due diligence.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 387 § 3 k.p.c.; Art. 168 § 1 k.p.c.; Art. 394 § 3 k.p.c.; Art. 398 § 1 k.p.c.; Art. 108 § 2 k.p.c.; Art. 391 § 1 k.p.c.; Art. 398 § 21 k.p.c. - The court must assess whether a missed procedural deadline was caused by the party's fault; failure to do so prevents proper review of the decision rejecting the request for a reasoned judgment.

Keywords

AI generated
procedural deadline reasoned judgment duty of due diligence fault-based dismissal appellate review service of verdict restoration of term

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 387 § 3 k.p.c.
Art. 168 § 1 k.p.c.
Art. 394 § 3 k.p.c.
Art. 398 § 1 k.p.c.
Art. 108 § 2 k.p.c.
Art. 391 § 1 k.p.c.
Art. 398 § 21 k.p.c.
art. 387 § 3 k.p.c
art. 391 § 1 k.p.c
art. 3941 § 2 k.p.c

Cited Case Law

AI generated
II CZ 103/05
Sygn. akt II CZ 103/05 POSTANOWIENIE Dnia 23 listopada 2005 r. Sąd Najwyższy w składzie: SSN Stanisław Dąbrowski (przewodniczący) SSN Bronisław Czech SSN Irena Gromska-Szuster (sprawozdawca) w sprawie z powództwa A. B. i T. B. przeciwko J. P. o odwołanie darowizny, po rozpoznaniu na posiedzeniu niejawnym w Izbie Cywilnej w dniu 23 listopada 2005 r., zażalenia powodów na postanowienie Sądu Apelacyjnego z dnia 23 maja 2005 r., sygn. akt I ACa (…)/04, I ACz (…)/05, oddala zażalenie. Uzasadnienie Zaskarżonym postanowieniem z dnia 23 maja 2005 r.
III CZ 22/07
Supreme Court dismisses appeal for late appeal fee error by legal counsel as lack of fault.
I UO 3/08
Supreme Court dismisses late renewal appeal due to failure to observe legal representation compulsion.

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