scholarly journals OPINION ON THE INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 942(4) OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 179-188
Author(s):  
Jorge Sinde Monteiro ◽  
Maria José Capelo
Keyword(s):  
Civil Procedure ◽  
General Rules ◽  
History Of

Summary Introductory. Method Issues 1. Brief history of the precept 2. Interpretation of Article 942(4): the relevance of setting the rise mode and the effect of the appeal 3. The application of the general rules on the admissibility of appeals against decisions at first instance 4. The admissibility of a review appeal in the special reporting procedure CONCLUSIONS

scholarly journals LOOKS of PROFESSOR V.H.DEMCHENKO (1831-1914) IN RELATION TO SHOWS OF WITNESSES AS PROOF IN RULE-MAKING IN TIME OF KYIV RUS

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Historical Research ◽  
Peter The Great ◽  
General Rules ◽  
History Of ◽  
History Of Law ◽  
True Order ◽  
Russian Law ◽  
Rule Making ◽  
Judicial Role

Historyof Law Kyiv Rus, without regard to the more than 200-years-old period of her research, continues to remain in the field of attention of scientists, and, also, politicians. One of important questions of History of Law these period is a question about rule-making and role in him shows of witnesses. This problem was studied thoroughly enough as early as ХІХ of century and one of active acting persons of discussion round this theme there was a historian of law, native of Ukraine, professor of the Kyiv university Vasyl Hryhorovych Demchenko. In the master's degree dissertation "Historical research is about the shows of witnesses as proof in matters of judicial, accoding the Russian law before Peter the Great" (in 1859), V.H. Demchenko considered becoming of such important institute of judicial law as institute of certificate in detail. A scientist marks the value of judicial proofs in general genesis of law, he underlines that before an arbitrariness was the only means of guard of rights, but development of society resulted in a volume, that next to this means already the guard of rights for cramps began to be used. He considered that the judicial aspects related to the shows of witnesses are system enough set forth in Russian True. A researcher paid attention to that Russian True talks about witnesses in most cases in connection with those the offences that must be by them validified, in accordance with every case, where this proof is required. Therefore resolutions about them matter general not rules that spread to all possible cases of their use, but touch only private, that have force only for those cases for that they are straight set. General rules some resolutions that is unconnected with determinations about separate offences matter only. A scientist underlined that the judicial role of witnesses accoding Russian True did not have been limited to only the value of them, as judicial proof. On occasion they got the certain participating in realization of process. It touched those judicial events application of that got to parties without every participation of some government bodies ( for example,zvid). In the research of V.H. Demchenko analysed a question about the capacity of witnesses for a certificate, specified also on space of application of proofs with participation of witnesses after Russian True, order of finishing telling with participation of witnesses, force of shows of witnesses. Thus, V.H. Demchenko no doubt, was one of the most skilled specialists on history law that investigated time of Kyiv Rus.

Provisional and Protective Measures

2021 ◽  
pp. 219-239
Author(s):  
European Law
Keyword(s):  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Protective Measures ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
General Rules ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Regulatory Measures ◽  
General Part ◽  
Asset Preservation

This chapter focuses on provisional and protective measures, which are important both in domestic and cross-border litigation to secure effective enforcement or to otherwise preserve rights and prevent (further) harm prior to the commencement of proceedings or pending final judgment. Part X of the European Rules of Civil Procedure consists of three Parts: a General Part (Section 1), which includes rules that apply to all types of measures, unless otherwise provided; a Special Part (Section 2), which includes rules on Asset Preservation, Regulatory Measures, Evidence Preservation, and Interim Payments; and a Cross-Border Part (Section 3), which primarily refers to existing legislation. Section 3 further provides a minimal number of general rules as it is not intended to provide a set of rules on the complex and multifaceted issue of cross-border provisional and protective measures. Principle 8 of the ALI/UNIDROIT Principles was the starting point for the development of Rules concerning provisional and protective measures. This Principle includes three basic rules: on function and proportionality (8.1); ex parte measures; (8.2); and compensation and security (8.3).

41. Judgments and Orders

2020 ◽  
pp. 446-455
Author(s):  
Stuart Sime
Keyword(s):  
Civil Procedure ◽  
General Rules

This chapter discusses the rules on judgments and orders. Although there is likely to be a delay between judgment being pronounced and the judgment being sealed and served, r 40.7(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR) provides that judgment in fact takes effect from the day it was given. After a judgment or order has been pronounced by the court, the next step is to have it drawn up. This chapter discusses settlements; orders made at hearings; form of judgments and orders; general rules relating to drawing up orders and judgments; and register of judgments.

Summary Procedures in Israel and Abroad

1967 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 210-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ernst Livneh
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
European Institutions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Lower Courts ◽  
History Of ◽  
New Israel ◽  
Rules Of The Game ◽  
Summary Procedure

The new Israel Civil Procedure Rules, 1963 re-enact in rr. 269–82, with certain amendments, rr. 241–50 of the Palestinian Civil Procedure Rules, 1938 dealing with “Summary Procedure on Specially Endorsed Statement of Claim”, which in their turn were a colonial version of Order XIV of the English Rules of the Supreme Court. A glance at some recent judgments in Israel shows a surprising number of cases in which doubts have arisen as to the application and scope of the Summary Procedure in general and the defendant's right to be heard in particular. One may wonder whether litigants and lower courts quite understand the rules of the game or whether the game is after all not as easy as might be expected of a summary procedure. And indeed, compared with institutions in continental Europe, where scores of thousands of claims are disposed of without discussion and complaint, our Summary Procedure seems inelegant and burdensome on plaintiff and defendant alike. It is the object of this study to compare it, and the procedure under the English Order XIV, with those European institutions. In view of the gap between Anglo-Israel and Continental notions of civil procedure it may be useful also to sketch the history of the various forms of action, viz. the (summary) trial by documents, the non-litigious executory instruments and the conditional command to pay.

A History of Continental Civil Procedure

1928 ◽  
Vol 37 (5) ◽  
pp. 680
Author(s):  
Charles E. Clark ◽  
Arthur Engelmann ◽  
Robert Wyness Millar
Keyword(s):  
Civil Procedure ◽  
History Of

scholarly journals Repayment of an outstanding debt trough tax receivables of the taxpayer: do we need to amend the legislation?

2019 ◽  
pp. 40-47
Author(s):  
E. S. Efremova
Keyword(s):  
Federal Law ◽  
Present Stage ◽  
Accounts Receivable ◽  
Tax Legislation ◽  
General Rules ◽  
Subsequent Application ◽  
History Of ◽  
Outstanding Debt ◽  
The Right ◽  
Current Procedure

The paper analyzes the use of imposing restorative measures of coercion on taxpayers having tax debts in the form of recovery of arrears from the amounts due to the outstanding debtor by his or her debtors.The author has examined the history of the institution of foreclosure on accounts receivable of the taxpayer in the domestic tax legislation of the 20th century and at the present stage, the experience of this institution’s functioning under the laws of Kazakhstan and Belarus, has analyzed the rules governing the foreclosure on accounts receivable under the Federal Law «On Enforcement Proceedings.»On the basis of the study, the author concludes that the current procedure for collecting receivables is ineffective and proposes to empower tax authorities to apply this measure of coercion directly to debtors are criticized, since they are not participants of tax relations.The author suggests that the Federal Law «On Enforcement Proceedings» be supplemented with additional rules providing for the right of the bailiff to appeal to the court to recover the amount of receivables from the debtor and for the subsequent application of the general rules of enforcement proceedings to the debtor. 

scholarly journals Forum of necessity in Quebec Private International Law: C.c.Q. art. 3136

2014 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-124
Author(s):  
John P. McEvoy
Keyword(s):  
Critical Factor ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Legislative History ◽  
Swiss Law ◽  
General Rules ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Common ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
Court Of Appeal

Article 3136 C.c.Q. is a departure from the general rules of jurisdiction applicable to a Quebec authority. Based on the principle of necessity and in the absence of an appropriate forum, it authorizes an authority to exercise jurisdiction in relation to a matter not subject to its direct jurisdiction when it is impossible or unreasonable for the parties to access a foreign authority and when the litigation has a sufficient connection with Quebec. Article 3136 thus confers a discretionary jurisdiction on a Quebec authority. This discretion is limited by the definitional elements expressed in article 3136 and has been further narrowed by an inappropriate interpretation by the Court of Appeal in Lamborghini. The critical factor is that necessity jurisdiction implies that the litigation is subject to an effective remedy in the Quebec forum. Availability of an effective remedy renders reasonable the exercise of necessity jurisdiction and the requirement that foreign litigation be instituted, unreasonable. However, the factor of remedy is ignored, or without expression, in both doctrine and jurisprudence. Supported by a comparative approach between the civil law and the common law, the first part presents a general analysis of this exceptional rule with particular attention to the Swiss law which inspired the drafters of article 3136. In the second part, article 3136 is considered in context with the general provisions of the Code and the legislative history of the provision is clarified. The third part analyzes the definitional elements of the article and the last part examines its application as reflected in the relevant jurisprudence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document