Abstract

In its Decision of 28 January 2016, III CZP 100/15, the Supreme Court refused to answer a legal question posed by the Appellate Court in Warsaw whether a person who, after the judgment of the court of first instance, joined the trial as the heir whose legal succession was established by a court decision issued under Art. 679 §1 & 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure instead of a person who appeared during the proceedings before the court first instance as the legal successor of the deceased in those proceedings under the certificate of succession which was subsequently modified, is bound by the time limit for filing an appeal the purported successor of the deceased is entitled to and the scope of the appeal filed by that purported successor. Basing on the facts of the case, the gloss generally discusses the issue of the heir’s participation in the proceedings initiated by the deceased party, among others in a situation when a decision was issued under Art. 679 §1 & 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure.