Abstract

The article discusses the problem of fulfilling the obligation to consider in the decision the entirety of claimant’s request in a case concerning adverse possession of real estate. This obligation arises from Art. 325 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which may also be applied in non-litigious procedure (Art. 13 § 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure). Referring to the Supreme Court Resolution of 11 December 2014, III CZP 94/14, the author accepts the view that in a adverse possession case the court should consider the entirety of claimant’s request also when the decision is partially negative meaning that adverse possession has been adjudicated with respect to an area smaller than specified in the request. On the other hand, the omission of a part of the request in the decision may be removed by filing a motion to supplement the decision (Art. 351 § 1 in conjunction with Art. 361 and Art. 13 § 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure).