Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
I CSK 16/24 AI generated

Cassation appeal dismissed because the cassation complaint was filed after the statutory deadline expired.

Case Number I CSK 16/24
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Poland (PL)
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal filed by A.T., A.T.1, and A.R. against the First Instance Court's decision to dissolve co-ownership. The applicants argued for the annulment of the lower court's ruling, but the Court found the appeal procedurally time-barred. Consequently, the cassation complaint was rejected because it was submitted after the expiration of the statutory period for filing such appeals.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 489 § 1 pkt 1 k.p.c.; Art. 489 § 2 k.p.c.: A cassation appeal is inadmissible if filed after the expiration of the statutory period, regardless of the merits of the underlying dispute.

Keywords

AI generated
cassation appeal statutory deadline time bar procedural inadmissibility co-ownership dissolution

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 489 § 1 pkt 1 k.p.c.
Art. 489 § 2 k.p.c.

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

I CSK 16/24 POSTANOWIENIE 28 marca 2024 r.Sąd Najwyższy w Izbie Cywilnej w składzie: SSN Paweł Grzegorczyk na posiedzeniu niejawnym 28 marca 2024 r. w Warszawie‎w sprawie z wniosku P.K. i I.K.‎z udziałem A.T., A.T.1 i A.R.‎o zniesienie współwłasności,‎na skutek skargi kasacyjnej A.T., A.T.1 i A.R.‎od postanowienia Sądu Okręgowego w Szczecinie ‎z 7 lipca 2023 r., II Ca 674/22, zwraca skargę kasacyjną wraz z aktami sprawy Sądowi Okręgowemu w Szczecinie po stwierdzeniu, że w komparycji zaskarżonego postanowienia, wydanego na rozprawie, nie oznaczono protokolanta. (K.G.)(r.g.)