Abstract

In its resolution of 14 June 2019 (III CZP 4/19), the Supreme Court found that a judicial writ of enforcement issued for the Agricultural Property Agency may be appended with an enforcement clause in favour of the National Support Centre for Agriculture with no need to prove by a public or private document with an officially certified signature that the right covered by the writ has been transferred (Art. 788 § 1 of the Code). There is no need to apply the evidentiary requirements as set out in Art. 788 § 1 of the Code owing to the fact that the legal regulation offers more certainty as to the ensuing of legal succession and consequently also gives greater warranty as to the protection of rights than evidence in the form of a public or private document with an officially certified signature. However, that opinion applies exclusively to a situation whereby the law refers to a specific individually identified entity which has been liquidated and another specific individually identified entity which has become its legal successor by law under a general rule.