Glosa aprobująca do uchwały sądu najwyższego 7 sędziów z dnia 20 czerwca 2017 roku, sygn. akt III CZP 114/16 (OSNC 2017 nr 12 poz. 130)
AbstractThe purpose of this article is to comment on the Supreme Court resolution dated 20th June 2017, case no. III CZP 114/16 (OSNC 2017 no 12, 130) and adopted by 7 judges. This resolution addresses whether article no. 50 of the Act on compulsory liability insurance, Polish Guarantee Fund and Polish Motor Insurers’ Bureau should be applicable to the damage caused by a dog used by a farmer. In the author’s view, the Supreme Court properly indicated, that if the circumstances of the case are such that there is sufficient evidence, to show that the dog would be considered as an element of the agricultural farm, then as a result and there is a link between the damage and the possession of the agricultural farm – and as a consequence the insurer, following the duty derived from art no. 50, must compensate for the damage.
|Other language title versions||Commentary on supreme Court resolution of 20th June 2017, case no. III CZP 114/14 (OSNC 2017 no 12, 130), adopted by 7 judges - on the damage caused by a dog used by a farmer on the agricultural farm in the light of the article 50 para. 1 of the compulsory liability insurance, Polish Guarantee fund and Polish Motor insurers’ Bureau act|
|Journal series||Wiadomości Ubezpieczeniowe, ISSN 0137-7264, (N/A 20 pkt)|
|Publication size in sheets||0.5|
|Score||= 20.0, 28-01-2020, ArticleFromJournal|
* presented citation count is obtained through Internet information analysis and it is close to the number calculated by the Publish or Perish system.