Abstract

In this gloss the author criticized the Supreme Court position that if an application for legal aid submitted as a response to the call for payment of the fee for an appeal against a judgement in default was returned the call for payment for the appeal is repeated in accordance with Art. 130 § 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The author referred to the clear contents of Art. 112.2 and 112.3 of the Act on civil court costs which does not provide for the return of an application for legal aid.In consequence, the return of an application for legal aid in case of an appeal annuls the procedural consequences of its submission (Art. 130 § 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure).The application has not invalidated the run of the time limit for payment, which expired without effect. The author also noted negative procedural consequences of the SC position for the judicial practice connected with incessant breaking of the running of the time limit for payment by repeating defective applications for legal aid.