KCC 1611/2013
This case involved a payment order which had been increased on appeal. Key points included whether the court could refuse to add a new company which had not been included before the elementary court in the case and if it had the right to ignore objections to the expert report.
Background
The documents of the case revealed that the court had amended the appealed ruling by increasing the amount of money that the appellant should pay to the first litigant.
Decision
The court said that the court concluded that the appellant had failed to prove that the litigant had failed to commit to their obligation according to the contract. The court said that the appellant's defence that the court had failed to respond to their objections to the report of expert was irrelevant. The court said that the court had rejected the appellant's request for the addition of a new company to the case because the company was not party in the case before the elementary court. The court said that the court established its ruling on the grounds of solid evidence.
The court dismissed the appeal.