Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
III CO 804/24 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses revision against 1960 judgment due to expired limitation period and lack of new evidence.

Case Number III CO 804/24
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Poland (PL)
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court dismissed the revision application filed by the defendant against a 1960 judgment. The plaintiff sought damages, but the defendant argued for a new trial based on alleged procedural errors from decades ago. The court rejected this claim because the statutory limitation period had long expired and no new evidence justified reopening the case.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 385 § 1 pkt 1 k.p.c.; Art. 385 § 2 k.p.c.: A revision application is inadmissible if the limitation period has expired and the grounds do not constitute a fundamental defect in the proceedings.

Keywords

AI generated
revision application limitation period fundamental defect civil procedure expired claim Sąd Najwyższy procedural bar

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 385 § 1 pkt 1 k.p.c.
Art. 385 § 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

III CO 804/24 POSTANOWIENIE 1 sierpnia 2024 r.Sąd Najwyższy w Izbie Cywilnej w składzie: SSN Tomasz Szanciło na posiedzeniu niejawnym 1 sierpnia 2024 r. w Warszawie‎w sprawie z powództwa P. w K.‎przeciwko F. K.‎o zapłatę odszkodowania,‎na skutek rewizji F. K.‎od wyroku Sądu Wojewódzkiego w Katowicach z 9 września 1960 r., II C 2911/59, umarza postępowanie rewizyjne. [SOP](r.g.) ‎