An Overview of the Civil Procedure and Court System of Netherlands

When it comes to Dutch law, the initiation of civil litigation, there are just a few cases in the Netherlands. This is due to the harmonized Dutch culture. Therefore, compared to other European countries, the number of lawyers and judges per capita in the Netherlands is small. In this scientific paper, we will make an overview of the civil judicial organization, the types of civil proceedings, the obligation to represent the civil cases in the court through a lawyer, legal aid and also in more detail we will focus on the main stages of the civil trial as well as the conditions that must be met before initiating civil proceedings. We will analyze in detail the fact that in the Dutch Law, the defendant may deny the right to judicial reconciliation with the plaintiff, before initiating the proceedings and that it is also preferable in Dutch Law, that the opposing party is summoned to fulfill its obligations within a certain period. If without respecting this method, the court procedure is initiated, the court costs may be attributed to the initiator of the procedure, i.e the plaintiff. Except for proceedings before judges from subordinate regions in Dutch law, the general rule is that the proceedings must be presided over by the plaintiff's attorney (procurator litis) and by a lawyer selected from the list of attorneys registered with the Association. In this scientific paper, we will also pay special attention to the temporary legal protection and special procedures and we will also focus on the judgments and legal remedies in Dutch law.

Consequences of the Final Civil Decision in the Criminal Trial Pursuant to the Albanian Legislation

Judicial jurisdictions are separated; the criminal court has the jurisdiction to adjudicate charges brought by the prosecution, whereas other jurisdictions are exercised by the civil court and the administrative court. Thus, civil cases or in other words disputes between private entities, such as contractual obligations or inheritance issues, etc., are settled by the civil court, while disputes between individuals and public administration fall within the scope of administrative jurisdiction. Therefore, depending on the type of case, in Albania there are courts with separate judicial jurisdictions. However, in quite a few cases we might face cases where the different judicial jurisdictions are interwoven between them, in other words the consequences of a civil trial can affect the criminal trial. This paper will analyze the legal provisions in Albania, how to act in cases of resolving a case with a final civil decision in relation to facts, which are also being adjudicated in the criminal process. This paper will also analyze the role of the final civil decision in the criminal trial. Domestic court practice will be considered in terms of the impact that a civilly resolved case by a final court decision has on a criminal case. Received: 31 May 2021 / Accepted: 31 September 2021 / Published: 5 November 2021

Influence of the Fundamental Attribution Error on Perceptions of Blame and Negligence

Automobile accidents are a frequent occurrence in the United States and commonly result in legal ramifications. Through a fundamental attribution error (FAE) framework ( Ross, 1977 ), the current research examined how individuals perceive blame and negligence in these cases. In Study 1 ( N = 360), we manipulated the driver (you vs. stranger) of a hypothetical accident scenario and the situational circumstances surrounding the accident (favorable vs. unfavorable). Supporting the FAE, individuals' situational blame attributions only varied as a function of situational circumstances when they themselves were hypothetically driving. However, neither the driver nor the situation significantly predicted dispositional blame attributions. Yet, Study 1 provided initial support for the importance of an individual's trait tendency to neglect situational constraints when making dispositional blame attributions. In Study 2 ( N = 212), we again manipulated situational circumstances surrounding the hypothetical accident, but within the context of a mock civil trial. Results provided additional support for the importance of this trait tendency and expanded our findings of dispositional blame attributions to perceptions of negligence. Implications include the importance of considering trait individual differences in the likelihood to ignore situational demands when individuals are making legally relevant judgments about automobile accidents.

29. Multi-Track

The multi-track deals with a vast range of cases, from simple contractual disputes involving little more than £25,000, to complex commercial cases involving difficult issues of fact and law with values of several million pounds, to cases where perhaps no money is at stake but which raise points of real public importance. Cases on the multi-track will generally be dealt with either in the Royal Courts of Justice or other civil trial centre. This chapter discusses agreed directions; case management conferences; fixing the date for trial; pre-trial checklists; listing hearings; pre-trial review; directions given at other hearings; and variation of case management timetable.

Kekuatan Pembuktian Suatu Surat Pernyataan Bermaterai Dalam Sengketa Keperdataan di Pengadilan

In every civil dispute in the court, it is often to find a statement letter with a seal on it, which is used in other to proving or claiming a person's rights, nevertheles how is the legality in a civil trial? This writing is conducted in order to describe the evidentiary force of a letter made on a stamp duty through normative legal research method by examining problems normatively using a conceptual approach. A stamped statement is a privately made deed as evidence and filed in a civil dispute in court. It can have the full evidentiary force as long as the party in the letter acknowledges its veracity. Keywords: Evidence, Stamped, Civil Dispute

Problems of Approval the Individual Pension Coefficient in Court

The broadening and toughening the legal requirements as the result of an continuing reform of the pension insurance system which are necessary for accrual the right to them in the coming years will contribute to the growth of the number of trials with the subdivisions of the Pension Fund of Russia. Note that in the actual system of facts that determine the right to an insurance pension, the individual retirement coefficient (IRC) is the most difficult of pension legal relations cases, which requires the formation of new competencies for judges and the development of uniform practice. The purpose of the work is to find effective models of law enforcement, means and methods of protecting the right that eligible of the citizens' interests and standarts-driven of civil trial. The issue of the research are to analyze the effective procedural proceedings applicable to the IRC confirmation. The research is based on open sources of information, including statistical data, special literature, normative legal acts and judicial practice, using General scientific (theoretical and empirical level: dialectical, observation, description) and special legal methods (comparative legal, formal legal, legal modeling) of the study. The article contains grounds of the perfection and ensuring of the systemacy of the individual provisions of the Russian social security law. It concluded that the legal investigation of relevant cases could be carry out both in the action proceedings or special proceedings. The proper mechanism for establishing an individual pension coefficient in the action proceeding should be considered claims for admission illegal the refusal of pension's fixing, as well as for forcing the policyholder (employer) to pay insurance fee. Also proposed to allow in some cases confirmation of the IRC in the order of special proceeding.

Civil liability and the 50%+ standard of proof

The standard of proof applied in civil trials is the preponderance of evidence, often said to be met when a proposition is shown to be more than 50% likely to be true. A number of theorists have argued that this 50%+ standard is too weak—there are circumstances in which a court should find that the defendant is not liable, even though the evidence presented makes it more than 50% likely that the plaintiff’s claim is true. In this paper, I will recapitulate the familiar arguments for this thesis, before defending a more radical one: The 50%+ standard is also too strong—there are circumstances in which a court should find that a defendant is liable, even though the evidence presented makes it less than 50% likely that the plaintiff’s claim is true. I will argue that the latter thesis follows naturally from the former once we accept that the parties in a civil trial are to be treated equally. I will conclude by sketching an alternative interpretation of the civil standard of proof

Submission of a Civil Suit by a Prosecutor in the Interests of a State as a Way of Compensation for Damage, Caused by a Criminal Offence

The outcome of every trial is always accompany by some interest where the civil attains compensation and the criminal imprisonment and fines. In achieving the said interest in a trial process, it is the role of the prosecutor in establishing that the accused is guilty of the crime committed. This article articulates, that it is the role of prosecutor to carry out justice in the name of the State whether during criminal or civil trial. The principle is clear here as we all know that during criminal proceedings the prosecutor is the principal party, but such trial cannot succeed if in the course of the criminal act the victim also incurred damages caused by the accused. In this regard, it is also the role of the prosecuting counsel to make a submission for such civil act that has caused damages to the victim. There are lots of complexities surrounding the understanding and interpretation of the word "interest of the state" as many states fails in establishing this is their various legislation in which the state of Ukraine is not an exception. Notwithstanding the important of this concept in every trial whether civil or criminal, what becomes of its outcome when effective recognition is not attached to it in terms of legislative recognition? It is there in this safeguard that there was a necessity in examining the place occupied by the submission of civil suits for the interest of the state and its implications in matters related to damages was deemed necessary.

Mediator in the Polish civil trial

The article discusses the results of research on the functioning of judicial mediation in civil cases. The effectiveness of mediation is assessed on the basis of the number of concluded settlements or discontinued proceedings as a result of approval of the settlement concluded before the mediator. In the course of the research, the reasons for too low in relation to the expected popularity of mediation were identified, both among the society and professionals related to mediation. For over a dozen years the provisions on mediation have been in force, it has provided many observations and conclusions regarding their functioning.

2. Burden and Standard of Proof

Chapter 2 is divided into two parts. The first part is concerned with the manner in which a dispute as to which party bears the burden of proving a particular issue in a trial should be resolved. The question may arise in a criminal trial as to whether it is the prosecution or defence which bears the burden of proving a certain issue, and in a civil trial as to whether it is the claimant or defendant who bears the burden of proving a certain issue. The second part focuses on the standard to which the burden of proving a particular issue requires to be discharged.