scholarly journals ITALIAN COMMERCIAL LITIGATION: AN OUTLINE

Author(s):  
Мишеле Де Мео ◽  
Mishele De Meo

The article contains the outline of the commercial litigation implemented in Italy taking into account the relevant amendments and changes adopted with the aim of rendering a “faster” justice. The author describes the Italian judicial system which involves courts of first instance (Giudice di Pace/Tribunale), the Court of Appeal (Corte d’Appello), and the Supreme Court or the Court of Cassation (Corte di Cassazione), indicating the statutorily prescribed criteria for referring a specific category of cases to the jurisdiction of each of those. The author dwells on the stages of civil proceedings, which include: pre-trial hearings, civil proceedings and judgment, appeal and cassation stages, as well as enforcement of judgments and orders. The special attention is paid for the procedure of the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgment and arbitration awards used in Italy. The author notes the tendency for a gradual replacement of the most of the old bilateral treaties in Europe by the European Regulations, at least in civil and commercial matters.

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-74
Author(s):  
Sankalp Mishra

There is a need for the establishment of regional benches of the Supreme Court. By the analysis of various statistical data, the paper puts forward the urgent need for widening the reach of the Supreme Court and also to rejuvenate and reestablish the tarnishing reputation of the Supreme Court as an ordinary court of appeal. The paper explores the essential reasons for the establishment of benches of Supreme Court that can be broadly divided into three heads namely (i) wide access to justice (ii) Supreme Court reduced to an ordinary court of appeal (iii) litigation as a measure of well-being. The paper also analyses the recommendations laid out in the 95th, 120th, 125th and 229th Law Commission reports and analyses problem in hand, on the basis of analysis and the immediate need for the reform of the judicial system.


1930 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 416-425 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. R. Aumann

In 1923 the first state judicial council in this country was established in Ohio. The Massachusetts act providing for such a council was introduced earlier and formed the basis for the Ohio law, but it was not adopted until 1924. The judicial council provided for by the Ohio law was composed of the chief justice of the supreme court, two associate justices, the chief justice of the court of appeal, one common pleas judge, one municipal court judge, and three lawyers.The council was charged with the duty of making a continuous study of the organization, rules, methods of procedure, and practice of the judicial system of Ohio, as well as the work accomplished and results produced by that system and its various parts. The results of this continuous study were to be reported biennially to the legislature, with such recommendations for the modification of existing conditions as the council might see fit to make. The council was authorized also to submit suggestions for the consideration of the judges of the several courts with regard to rules, practice, and procedure.To accomplish its purposes, the council was authorized to hold public hearings, administer oaths, and require the attendance of witnesses and the production of books and documents. A witness giving false testimony, or failing to appear when duly summoned, was made subject to the same penalties to which a witness before a court is subject. The clerks of the various courts and other officials are required to submit to the council such reports as the council may prescribe.


2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 161
Author(s):  
Agnieszka Kincbok

Admissibility of Cassation Complaint Subject to the Matter of AppealSummaryThe cassation complaint is an appeal from sentences or decisions of courts of the second instance. After more than 40 years the cassation was reintroduced to the Polish civil proceedings by the amendment to the Civil Proceedings Code (CPC) of 1 March 1996. The court which handles cassation complaints is the Supreme C ourt located in Warsaw. The Supreme Court does not consider cases but examines whether the judicial decisions comply with applicable laws.The cassation complaint cannot be filed in all cases. The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is limited by the type of the case and by the amount of the claim. This article addresses the question of when the cassation complaint is admissible (in civil proceedings, non - litigious proceedings, execution and bankruptcy proceedings and procedure for recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments) because of the criteria ratione materiae, i.e. subject, type of the case. The above-mentioned instrument is excluded, for example, in the cases examined in the simplified procedure, in alimony cases, some inheritance cases and from divorce sentences.This paper also discusses the ratione valoris criteria. According to the Rom an law rule de minimis non curat praetor, in cases concerning property rights cassation complaint is inadmissible when the am ount of the claim does not exceed the sum specified in the CPC.


2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 276-293
Author(s):  
Mateusz Radajewski

Summary The article concerns the issue of constitutionality of the reform of the justice system in Poland in 2017–2018, which resulted in significant changes of the functioning of the National Council of the Judiciary and the Supreme Court. When discussing the reform of the Supreme Court, the author first of all points to the constitutional problems associated with the premature retirement of some of its judges, which is also connected with the interruption of the six-year term of the First President of the Supreme Court. A separate issue discussed in the article is the introduction to the Supreme Court the lay judges, which is a unique phenomenon on the global scale. The analyses lead the author to formulate final conclusions, also referring to the European regulations and to refer to the unconstitutionality of the solutions adopted by the Polish parliament.


2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sipho Stephen Nkosi

The note is about the appeal lodged by the late Mrs Winnie Madikizela-Mandela to the SCA against the decision of the Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha, dismissing her application for review in 2014. In that application, she sought to have reviewed the decision of the Minister of Land Affairs, to transfer the now extended and renovated Qunu property to Mr Mandela and to register it in his name. Because her application was out of time, she also applied for condonation of her delay in making the application. The court a quo dismissed both applications with costs, holding that there had been an undue delay on her part. Mrs Mandela then approached the Supreme Court of Appeal, for special leave to appeal the decision of the court a quo. Two questions fell for decision by the SCA: whether there was an unreasonable and undue delay on Mrs Mandela’s part in instituting review proceedings; and whether the order for costs was appropriate in the circumstances of the case. The SCA held that there was indeed an unreasonable delay (of seventeen years). Shongwe AP (with Swain, Mathopo JJA, Mokgothloa and Rodgers AJJA concurring) held that the fact that there had been an undue delay does not necessarily mean that an order for costs should, of necessity, particularly where, as in this case, the other litigant is the state. It is the writer’s view that two other ancillary points needed to be raised by counsel and pronounced on by the Court: (a) the lawfulness and regularity of the transfer of the Qunu property to Mr Mandela; and (b) Mrs Mandela’s status as a customary-law widow—in relation to Mr Mandela.


2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 112-121
Author(s):  
Shamier Ebrahim

The right to adequate housing is a constitutional imperative which is contained in section 26 of the Constitution. The state is tasked with the progressive realisation of this right. The allocation of housing has been plagued with challenges which impact negatively on the allocation process. This note analyses Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality v Various Occupiers, Eden Park Extension 51 which dealt with a situation where one of the main reasons provided by the Supreme Court of Appeal for refusing the eviction order was because the appellants subjected the unlawful occupiers to defective waiting lists and failed to engage with the community regarding the compilation of the lists and the criteria used to identify beneficiaries. This case brings to the fore the importance of a coherent (reasonable) waiting list in eviction proceedings. This note further analyses the impact of the waiting list system in eviction proceedings and makes recommendations regarding what would constitute a coherent (reasonable) waiting list for the purpose of section 26(2) of the Constitution.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Lieneke Slingenberg

In September 2012, the Dutch Supreme Court upheld a judgment of the Hague Court of Appeal that the eviction from basic shelter of a mother and her minor children, who did not have legal residence in the Netherlands, was unlawful. This ruling was instigated by a radically new interpretation of the European Social Charter’s personal scope and caused a major shift in Dutch policy. This article provides a case study into the legal reasoning adopted by the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court. It argues that, instead of relying on legal doctrinal reasoning for justifying the outcome, both courts referred to factors that the general public relies on to assess people’s deservingness of welfare. This finding raises fundamental questions about the relationship between human rights law and deservingness; and calls, therefore, for further research into the relevance of deservingness criteria in judicial discourse.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (2) ◽  
pp. 253-271
Author(s):  
Emile Zitzke

In this article, I trace the development in the law of delict of recognising general damages claims on account of psychiatric lesions with the aim of making suggestions on how to transform it. Using the tragic case of Michael Komape as a springboard for the discussion, I argue that even though the Supreme Court of Appeal has recently brought clarity on the law on psychiatric lesions, more transformative work still needs to be done. More specifically, this article contends that the constitutional right to bodily and psychological integrity might require us to rethink the high evidentiary threshold that courts have set for proving the element of harm in cases related to psychiatric lesions. I argue that this can be done in at least three ways: First, by very cautiously bringing about a development that would involve protecting victims of psychological harm whose expert witnesses are shown to be inadequate despite all other facts indicating the existence of a psychiatric lesion. Secondly, by lowering the requirement of “recognised psychiatric lesion” to “grievous mental injury”, in line with similar arguments made in England. Thirdly, and most controversially, by acknowledging that perhaps the time has come for our law to recognise claims for so-called “grief in the air”.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document