Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
V CSK 465/18 Generato dall'IA

Supreme Court rejects plaintiff's request to clarify and explain the reasoning of a prior Supreme Court order.

Numero d'incarto V CSK 465/18
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Polonia (PL)
Esito del giudizio Respinto (Dismissed)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Supreme Court dismissed the plaintiff's motion to supplement and explain the reasoning of a previous Supreme Court order. The plaintiff, K. H., sought clarification regarding the court's decision against them in a personality rights dispute. The court rejected the request because the prior order was already sufficiently reasoned and no new facts or arguments justified a revision.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

Art. 200 § 1 k.p.c.; Art. 200 § 2 k.p.c.: A party's request to supplement or explain the reasoning of a Supreme Court order is rejected if the original decision is already fully reasoned and the request lacks new factual or legal grounds.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
Supreme Court order personality rights procedural clarification reasoning explanation motion rejection civil procedure supplementary request

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
Art. 200 § 1 k.p.c.
Art. 200 § 2 k.p.c.

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

Sygn. akt V CSK 465/18 POSTANOWIENIE Dnia 16 lipca 2020 r.Sąd Najwyższy w składzie: SSN Roman Trzaskowski w sprawie z powództwa K. H.‎przeciwko A. K.‎o ochronę dóbr osobistych,‎na posiedzeniu niejawnym w Izbie Cywilnej w dniu 16 lipca 2020 r.,‎na skutek wniosku powódki o uzupełnienie i wyjaśnienie podstaw ‎uzasadnienia postanowienia Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 22 sierpnia 2020 r. ‎sygn. akt V CSK (…), odrzuca wniosek.