Compliance with the Time Limit of Article 129 (4) of the Act of 27 April 2017 the Environmental Law in the Case-Law of the Supreme Court

The study discusses issues related to maintaining the deadline for suing claims due to restrictions on the use of real estate provided for in Article 129 (1–3) of the Environmental Protection Law. Provided for in the provisions of Articles 129–136 of the Environmental Protection Law liability for damages was formed as a statutory obligation to compensate for damages resulting to property owners (holders of perpetual usufruct) from the introduction of legal regulations that narrow down the possibilities of using these properties. The conditions for liability are: entry into force of a regulation or act of local law resulting in a limitation on the way the property is used, damage suffered by the owner of the property, the holder of perpetual usufruct or the person holding property law, and a causal link between the restriction on the use of the property and the damage. Claims for damages derived from these sources meet the requirements of Articles 361–363 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Poland. They are property claims, subject to limitation (art. 117 § 1 of the Civil Code), however — without being tort claims — they are subject to limitation on general principles arising from Article 118 of the Civil Code. An important legal issue is whether, and if so, to what extent, it is possible to apply by analogy provisions on suspension or interruption of the limitation period to the preclusion period contained in Article 129 (4) of the Environmental Protection Law. The starting point for reflection on this issue are the arguments originating from the current case law of the Supreme Court. Based on the views and arguments of the Supreme Court, the author tries to answer the question on the conditions that meet the three-year period provided for in Article 129 (4) of the Environmental Protection Law asserting claims for restrictions on the use of real estat