Supreme Court dismissed claim for supplementary pension due to statute of limitations expiration under Civil Code. Plaintiff failed to prove valid excuse for delay in filing suit. Court upheld lower court's finding of time-barred claim. Plaintiff knew of injury and liable party long before filing suit. Knowledge of disability did not extend limitation period. Failure to file promptly resulted in loss of claim. Court rejected argument that employment provided excuse for delay. Statute of limitations expired before suit was filed. Claim dismissed as untimely under applicable law.
Pologne (PL)
Synthèse Legislator
Généré par l'IAThe Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal regarding a claim for supplementary pension arising from a workplace accident. The plaintiff, who suffered an injury in 1968, filed the claim in 1997 after over twenty years, citing ignorance of his rights. The lower courts determined the claim was time-barred because the ten-year limitation period expired in 1978, noting the plaintiff continued working until 1990. The Supreme Court affirmed this decision, rejecting the argument that the plaintiff's disability or continued employment justified the delay, as he had no valid excuse for not filing earlier.
Regeste Legislator
Généré par l'IAArt. 442 § 1 zd. 1 KC; Art. 442 § 2 KC; Art. 393 § 1 KPC: The limitation period for claiming supplementary pension begins from the date of the accident or when the victim fully loses the ability to work; mere disability or continued employment does not suspend the limitation period if the victim knew of the injury and liable party.