Supreme court will give produces
Jan 4, 2024 2:54:16 GMT
Post by account_disabled on Jan 4, 2024 2:54:16 GMT
Anew Code of Civil Procedure and the amendments made to Government Ordinance no. by Law no. the clarification of the legal issue is necessary for the resolution of the merits of the pending case and the supreme court has not ruled on it the issue not being the subject of an appeal in the interest of the law being resolved. . Regarding the second question essentially aiming at the application of the provisions of art. and of the Civil Procedure Code which regulates the forfeiture of the exercise of a right and respectively.
The reinstatement in the context of the examination of the Country Email List requirement that the substantive resolution of the case pending trial depends on the clarification of such a legal issue In the same sense the ECHR judgments pronounced in the cases of Salabiaku v. France and Telfner v. Austria. the following coordinates must be taken into account in such an analysis. . In the jurisprudence of the supreme court it has already been established that the formula on whose clarification depends the resolution of the case on the merits used by the legislator in the content of art. of the Code of Civil Procedure refers to a legal issue that can concern both a rule of substantive law and a rule of procedural law the condition for the.
Admissibility of the referral being that the interpretation that the consequences legal grounds to determine the merits of the case. . However it was ruled that in such a procedure the High Court of Cassation and Justice is not called and obviously it cannot replace the referring court in ruling on the effective way in which it is to capitalize in the procedural framework concrete of the case with the solution of which it is vested the resolution of the legal problem invoked ex officio as in the case of the.
The reinstatement in the context of the examination of the Country Email List requirement that the substantive resolution of the case pending trial depends on the clarification of such a legal issue In the same sense the ECHR judgments pronounced in the cases of Salabiaku v. France and Telfner v. Austria. the following coordinates must be taken into account in such an analysis. . In the jurisprudence of the supreme court it has already been established that the formula on whose clarification depends the resolution of the case on the merits used by the legislator in the content of art. of the Code of Civil Procedure refers to a legal issue that can concern both a rule of substantive law and a rule of procedural law the condition for the.
Admissibility of the referral being that the interpretation that the consequences legal grounds to determine the merits of the case. . However it was ruled that in such a procedure the High Court of Cassation and Justice is not called and obviously it cannot replace the referring court in ruling on the effective way in which it is to capitalize in the procedural framework concrete of the case with the solution of which it is vested the resolution of the legal problem invoked ex officio as in the case of the.