Supreme Court dismisses divorce case due to lack of jurisdiction over the defendant's residence.
Sintesi Legislator
Generato dall'IAThe Supreme Court dismissed the divorce action because the lower court lacked jurisdiction over the defendant's residence. The plaintiff argued for jurisdiction based on the defendant's temporary location, while the defendant contested this by asserting their permanent residence was elsewhere. The court ruled that jurisdiction depends strictly on the defendant's habitual residence, which was not established in the requested court's territory.
Regesto Legislator
Generato dall'IAArt. 10 ust. 1 k.p.c.; Art. 10 ust. 2 k.p.c.: Jurisdiction in divorce cases is determined by the defendant's habitual residence; if the defendant's residence is unknown or cannot be established, the court must decline jurisdiction.
Parole chiave
Generato dall'IADisposizioni normative citate
Generato dall'IATesto completo
Sygn. akt V CO 118/20 POSTANOWIENIE Dnia 26 kwietnia 2021 r.Sąd Najwyższy w składzie: SSN Kamil Zaradkiewicz w sprawie z powództwa D. B. przeciwko J. B. o rozwód,po rozpoznaniu na posiedzeniu niejawnym w Izbie Cywilnej w dniu 26 kwietnia 2021 r.,wniosku Sądu Okręgowego w O. o oznaczenie sądu właściwego do rozpoznania sprawy o sygn. akt I C (…), podejmuje postępowanie w sprawie. UZASADNIENIE