case law

id : 20008

id: 20008

Polish Supreme Court ruling

dated 26 October 1927

Case No. III Rw 1842/27

Summary by arbitraz.laszczuk.pl:

After being served with an arbitration award in June 1926, the petitioner filed what he titled an “invalidity petition” with the county court seeking to reduce the amount awarded to the respondent, alleging that he was not represented at the arbitration hearing and was denied a defence. In his response to the petition, the respondent did not oppose the relief sought. At the hearing, in December 1926, the petitioner requested a ruling by the court that the arbitration award was ineffective. The respondent objected to amendment of the relief sought by the petitioner. The county court denied the relief sought, as amended, and the appellate court upheld the judgment.

The Supreme Court of Poland denied the review sought by the petitioner on the basis of defective appellate pleading, but also found that the result below was legally correct. In the original petition, the petitioner included allegations that might justify a petition to set aside the award, but the petitioner did not seek to set aside the award but only to amend it, which the state court is not legally authorized to do. The petitioner did not assert a proper petition to set aside the award until the hearing in December 1926. Because this was more than 3 months after the petitioner was served with the arbitration award, the petition to set aside the arbitration award was time-barred, regardless of whether or not it was permissible for the petitioner to amend the relief sought at the hearing.

Excerpt from the text of the court’s ruling:

In a petition referred to as an “invalidity petition”..., the petitioner asserted grounds for ineffectiveness of an arbitration award under [former Austrian] Civil Procedure Code § 595(2), but did not seek to set aside the award but demanded statutorily impermissible amendment of the award on the merits. It follows that he did not assert at that time a petition to set aside the arbitration award (§ 596(1)), for which the code provides a period of three months from service of the arbitration award (§ 596(2)). … Thus if it was not until the hearing that the petitioner amended the relief sought and demanded that the award be set aside, it was only then, long after three months from service, that he asserted a proper petition to set aside the award. At that time he had already lost the right to assert the petition.

scroll up