Legislator Case Law & Legislation
II UZ 14/96 AI generated

Supreme Court mandates appeal court to appoint counsel ex officio when personal appeal includes such request within statutory deadline.

Case Number II UZ 14/96
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Poland (PL)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court overturned the Appeal Court's dismissal of Tadeusz T.'s personal appeal, which contained a request for an attorney to be appointed by the court. Although the Appeal Court rejected the appeal citing procedural requirements for legal representation, the Supreme Court found the personal appeal valid because it included a specific request for counsel within the one-month deadline. Consequently, the court ordered the Appeal Court to recognize the request and appoint an attorney rather than dismissing the appeal outright.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 393 2 § 1 KPC; Art. 465 § 1 KPC; Art. 117 § 1 KPC: When a party personally files an appeal within the statutory period containing a request for an attorney to be appointed by the court, the court is obligated to process that request and cannot dismiss the appeal solely on the grounds of the party's lack of legal representation.

Keywords

AI generated
personal appeal filing attorney appointment ex officio procedural deadline compliance legal representation requirement appeal dismissal grounds

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 393 2 § 1 KPC
Art. 465 § 1 KPC
Art. 117 § 1 KPC
Art. 117 § 2 KPC
Art. 393 4 KPC
Art. 393 12 KPC

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