On 5 March 2026 a very important composition resolution has been passed 7 Supreme Court judges. This resolution was in response to the Supreme Court’s decision of the day 16 May 2025, reference no. II CSKP 826/23 with regard to the transfer to the enlarged composition of the Supreme Court of a legal question of serious doubt: is the cassation action, in which the scope of the appeal is determined contrary to the scope of the request for annulment or amendment of the judgment, rejected?
In this resolution, reference no. III CZP 29/25 indicated that:
The definition of the scope of the appeal is necessary only if the application involves the repeal and amendment of the contested decision (Article 398 from ind. 4 section 1 point 3 k.p.c.). 2. Determination in the cassation action of the scope of the request to revoke the contested decision not in accordance with the scope of the appeal (Article 398 from ind. 4 section 1 point 1 k.p.c.) does not constitute an independent ground of rejection.
Indicate that Article 3984 section 1 point 1 k.p.c., provides that the cassation action should indicate whether it contests the decision in its entirety or in part, whereas section 2 point 3 The above-mentioned article should also include a request for repeal or amendment of a decision indicating the scope of the requested repeal and amendment.
Point second This resolution is a liberal approach to the formal requirements of the cassation complaint. To date, the Supreme Court’s case-law has dominated the view that in the complaint, the scope of the appeal and the request for annulment or amendment of the ruling must be closely correlated, and the absence of this correlation results in the rejection of the complaint without calling for the deficiency.
It follows from this resolution that the discrepancy between the application for the contested ruling and the scope of the appeal cannot be the only reason for the rejection of the cassation action. Therefore, such a complaint should be recognised in substance. It should be considered that this resolution of the Supreme Court constitutes a desirable less formalism in the preparation of a cassation action.