2023Studia IuridicaOpen access

SKARGA O WZNOWIENIE POSTĘPOWANIA ZAKOŃCZONEGO ORZECZENIEM SĄDU NAJWYŻSZEGO ZE SKARGI NADZWYCZAJNEJ

Krzysztof Olszak

Open full text 1 citations

Abstract

The paper discusses the problem of reopening of proceedings ended in a judgment of the Supreme Court on extraordinary appeal. It examines the admissibility of reopening of proceedings ended in a judgment on extraordinary appeal, court jurisdiction, court panel and cases in which the Supreme Court decides on the admissibility of the reopening. The study also focuses on the appealability of particular judgments on extraordinary appeal and possible decisions on the admissibility of reopening of proceedings using this procedure. The issues of the Supreme Court’s examination of the findings of fact and the power to file a petition for bringing extraordinary appeal proceedings are also addressed. It is concluded that the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to reopen proceedings ended in a judgment of the Supreme Court on extraordinary appeal in three cases: (i) when only the Supreme Court has applied a provision declared to be non-compliant with the Constitution of the Republic of Poland; (ii) when the proceedings have been invalid only before the Supreme Court; (iii) with respect to the restitutionary ground – when, adjudicating the extraordinary appeal, the Court has ruled on the merits of the case.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The paper discusses the problem of reopening of proceedings ended in a judgment of the Supreme Court on extraordinary appeal. It examines the admissibility of reopening of proceedings ended in a judgment on extraordinary appeal, court jurisdiction, court panel and cases in which the Supreme Court decides on the admissibility of the reopening. The study also focuses on the appealability of particular judgments on extraordinary appeal and possible decisions on the admissibility of reopening of proceedings using this procedure. The issues of the Supreme Court’s examination of the findings of fact and the power to file a petition for bringing extraordinary appeal proceedings are also addressed. It is concluded that the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to reopen proceedings ended in a judgment of the Supreme Court on extraordinary appeal in three cases: (i) when only the Supreme Court has applied a provision declared to be non-compliant with the Constitution of the Republic of Poland; (ii) when the proceedings have been invalid only before the Supreme Court; (iii) with respect to the restitutionary ground – when, adjudicating the extraordinary appeal, the Court has ruled on the merits of the case.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The paper discusses the problem of reopening of proceedings ended in a judgment of the Supreme Court on extraordinary appeal. It examines the admissibility of reopening of proceedings ended in a judgment on extraordinary appeal, court jurisdiction, court panel and cases in which the Supreme Court decides on the admissibility of the reopening. The study also focuses on the appealability of particular judgments on extraordinary appeal and possible decisions on the admissibility of reopening of proceedings using this procedure. The issues of the Supreme Court’s examination of the findings of fact and the power to file a petition for bringing extraordinary appeal proceedings are also addressed. It is concluded that the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to reopen proceedings ended in a judgment of the Supreme Court on extraordinary appeal in three cases: (i) when only the Supreme Court has applied a provision declared to be non-compliant with the Constitution of the Republic of Poland; (ii) when the proceedings have been invalid only before the Supreme Court; (iii) with respect to the restitutionary ground – when, adjudicating the extraordinary appeal, the Court has ruled on the merits of the case.

Key concepts: Appeal, Supreme court, Law, Political science, Jurisdiction, Original jurisdiction

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
SKARGA O WZNOWIENIE POSTĘPOWANIA ZAKOŃCZONEGO ORZECZENIEM SĄDU NAJWYŻSZEGO ZE SKARGI NADZWYCZAJNEJ — Research Paper | ScholarLens