Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
PL
Problem konstytucyjności służebności gruntowej o treści odpowiadającej służebności przesyłu oraz możliwości jej zasiedzenia jest przedmiotem ożywionej dyskusji już blisko od dekady. Mimo ugruntowanej i jednolitej linii orzeczniczej Sądu Najwyższego w tym zakresie sądy powszechne cały czas mają wątpliwości, czy ta wykładnia znajduje umocowanie w przepisach kodeksu cywilnego. Nie odmawiając interpretacji Sądu Najwyższego funkcjonalności, nie sposób jednak nie zauważyć towarzyszących jej mankamentów. Z tego względu warte uwagi są ostatnie orzeczenia Trybunału Konstytucyjnego, który zdaje się po raz pierwszy zdecydował się przełamać swoją bierną postawę.
EN
The problem of the constitutionality of a building lease with the content corresponding to transmission easement and the possibility of acquisitive prescription has been the subject of lively discussion already for almost a decade. Despite the well-established and unified jurisprudence of the Supreme Court in this regard, common courts constantly have doubts whether this interpretation is in line with the provisions of the Civil Code. The Supreme Court’s interpretation is thought to have some shortcomings. That is why the last ruling of the Constitutional Tribunal is worth paying attention to, as the Constitutional Tribunal seems to be for the first time active in this topic.
EN
The paper covers a nullity of the proceedings arising out of case where the representative of a party was not duly empowered within the meaning of the article 379 point 2. and the article 401 point 2. of the Polish Code of Civil Procedure. In practice this premise causes a lot of difficulties due to missing law permitting straight approval of procedural actions performed by a representative improperly empowered — having considered that categorical rejection of such an opportunity not always seems to be the right and justified decision. In the contents of the paper attention is paid to the fact that it is incorrect to equate the case in which a person was not able to perform as a proxy with the situation where the representative was improperly empowered. The first case entails the invalidity of the proceedings, while the latter may be subject to legitimization, as a result of a subsequent confirmation of the procedural actions taken by an empowered person. Finally, the issue of the admissibility of reporting such a violation by a party to the proceedings as well as their legal interest in such an action is raised. Such an analysis will permit to indicate the differences between cases along with an attempt to indicate a possible procedure when it occurs.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.