II UKN 246/98
Généré par l'IA
Supreme Court voids appeal judgment for omitting essential expert opinion on atypical disease progression under Art. 232 KPC.
Pologne (PL)
Synthèse Legislator
Généré par l'IAThe Supreme Court of Poland quashed the appellate court's judgment and remanded the case for retrial. The applicant sought disability pension, but the lower court rejected his appeal despite an ophthalmologist's suggestion that his eye condition might stem from a prior head injury. The court ruled that excluding the neurologist's opinion, which could explain the atypical disease progression, constituted a significant violation of procedural rules affecting the case outcome.
Regeste Legislator
Généré par l'IAArt. 232 KPC; Art. 233 § 1 KPC: Omitting an expert opinion that could significantly influence the case outcome constitutes a significant violation of the law requiring the retrial of the matter.
Mots-clés
Généré par l'IA
disability pension
expert opinion
atypical progression
procedural violation
significant violation
remand for retrial
neurological assessment
Dispositions légales citées
Généré par l'IAArt. 232 KPC
Art. 233 § 1 KPC
Art. 393 § 13 KPC
Art. 32 of the Act on Pensions for Employees and Their Families