Conclusions of the Parties in the Procedure of the Permanent Court of International Justice

1931 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 490-502 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. H. Feller

The Statute and Rules of the Permanent Court of International Justice are only remotely analogous to the detailed codes of civil procedure with which lawyers practising before municipal courts are familiar. The instruments governing the procedure of the Permanent Court are sketch maps rather than meticulously detailed charts for the procedural voyage. Nor is the body of tradition of international arbitral procedure sufficiently developed to furnish reliable guides in all circumstances. Of necessity, the practice of the court must develop out of the cases which come before it. The method of growth of its procedural law finds typical illustration in the question of the treatment, and, in particular of the amendment, of the conclusions of the parties.

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fawzia Cassim ◽  
Nomulelo Queen Mabeka

Civil procedure enforces the rules and provisions of civil law.  The law of civil procedure involves the issuing, service and filing of documents to initiate court proceedings in the superior courts and lower courts. Indeed, notice of legal proceedings is given to every person to ensure compliance with the audi alteram partem maxim (“hear the other side”). There are various rules and legislation that regulate these court proceedings such as inter alia, the Superior Courts Act, 2013, Uniform Rules of Court, Constitution Seventeenth Amendment Act, 2012 and the Magistrates’ Courts Act of 1944. The rules of court are binding on a court by virtue of their nature.  The purpose of these rules is to facilitate inexpensive and efficient legislation. However, civil procedure does not only depend on statutory provisions and the rules of court.  Common law also plays a role. Superior Courts are said to exercise inherent jurisdiction in that its jurisdiction is derived from common law.  It is noteworthy that whilst our rules of court and statutes are largely based on the English law, Roman-Dutch law also has an impact on our procedural law. The question thus arises, how can our law of civil procedure transform to accommodate elements of Africanisation as we are part and parcel of the African continent/diaspora? In this regard, the article examines the origins of Western-based civil procedure, our formal court systems, the impact of the Constitution on traditional civil procedure, the use of dispute resolution mechanisms in Western legal systems and African culture, an overview of the Traditional Courts Bill of 2012 and the advent of the Traditional Courts Bill of 2017. The article also examines how the contentious Traditional Courts Bills of 2012 and 2017 will transform or complement the law of civil procedure and apply in practice once it is passed into law.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 222-232
Author(s):  
D.Kh. VALEEV ◽  
N.N. MAKOLKIN

This article is an attempt to briefly analyze the scientific activity of Mikhail Konstantinovich Treushnikov, which is carried out through the prism of his publication activity in all its manifestations. In addition, this study presents an attempt to collect a complete bibliography of M.K. Treushnikov. The significance of this study is determined both by its uniqueness, which is due to the use of information from various sources, and the presence of individual theses and conclusions formulated by the authors. Thus, this work focuses on the fact that M.K. Treushnikov, in addition to considering the problems of civil and arbitral procedural law, paid attention to the development of problems of higher education, including in terms of methodology, and that, perhaps, allowed him to create a real school of civil procedure law in the walls of the Lomonosov Moscow State University. In addition, the thesis is put forward and substantiated that M.K. Treushnikov was actively engaged in questions of the law of evidence, as well as judicial law, which were widely reflected in his numerous works published in various journals and collections, as well as embodied in monographs.


2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 214-231
Author(s):  
S.I. Suslova

Introduction: the influence of the material branches of law on the content and development of procedural branches has long been substantiated in the legal literature. At the same time, civil law scholars, limited by the scope of the nomenclature of scientific specialties in legal sciences, do not have the opportunity to conduct dissertation research aimed at identifying the influence of procedural branches on the norms of substantive law. With regard to scientific research, the study of such an impact is currently permissible only within the specialty 12.00.15. Reforming the nomenclature of scientific specialties towards its enlargement creates the basis for the development of the scientific theory of intersectoral relations, developed by M.Iu. Chelyshev. An in-depth study of the intersectoral interaction of civil law and civil procedure will contribute not only to the development of scientific knowledge, but also will allow solving practical problems at a different methodological level. Purpose: to analyze the stages of the formation of scientific specialties in the context of the relationship between civil law and procedure, to identify the advantages and disadvantages of uniting and dividing civil law and procedure in scientific research, to analyze dissertations in different periods of development of the science of civil law and the science of civil procedure, to formulate ways to improve directions of research to bridge the gap between the science of civil law and procedure. Methods: empirical methods of description, interpretation; theoretical methods of formal and dialectical logic. The legal-dogmatic private scientific method was used. Results: identified the main views on the ratio of material and procedural branches in legal science; it is illustrated that the intersectoral approach is currently admissible only for dissertations in the specialty 12.00.15, which led to an almost complete absence of scientific research on this topic in civil science; substantiated the need to establish the bilateral nature of the relationship and interaction of material and procedural block. Conclusions: reforming the nomenclature of scientific specialties by right in the direction of their enlargement should have a positive effect on bridging the gap that has developed between works on civil law and civil law procedure in the last years of their separate existence. This is especially true of civil science, which developed its own scientific theories in isolation from the possibilities of their implementation within the framework of procedural law. The methodological basis for solving these problems has already been formed – this is an intersectoral method, the application of which is justified and demonstrated in the works of M.Iu. Chelyshev.


2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 141
Author(s):  
Holyness Singadimeja ◽  
Sherly Ayuna Puteri

Basically, the procedural law of industrial relations court is quite similar to civil procedure apply in ordinary court. Article 57 of Law No. 2 of 2004 states that the procedural law apply in industrial relations court is civil procedure apply in ordinary court, unless particularly provided in Law No. 2 of 2004. It means that Law No. 2 of 2004 is lex specialis of HIR, RBg, or Rv. Site examination often held in civil proceeding to obtain certain evidence and make clear the case. Unfortunately, in industrial relations case, site examination may lead to obstacles for the judges and the parties, mostly for the employees, since the time limit to solve the case and the costs that should be paid by the parties.


Author(s):  
A. D. Zolotukhin ◽  
◽  
L. A. Volchihina ◽  

On the basis of research, the structure of civil procedural law is defined as a system rather than an elementary set of legal norms and institutions. Determining the significance of the system of civil procedural law, it was concluded that having individuality, such a structure is one of the features that distinguish civil procedural law from other branches of law. The authors also come to the conclusion that the established properties of the system of civil procedural law, such as unity, interconnection (interaction) and independence of application, determine the possibility of applying individual elements of the structure of the system of civil procedural law, when considering substantive situations as an independent both individually and collectively. This ensures the possibility of obtaining the required positive result and characterizes it as universal. Critically examining various concepts, the authors offer their own definition of the concept of the system of civil procedural law. The conclusion is also made about the relationship of the system of civil procedural law with the principles of civil procedural law and the procedural form of civil legal proceedings.


2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 37
Author(s):  
Marcin Trepczyński

The Principle of Formal Truth in the Polish Civil Procedural Law and Non-monotonic ReasoningSummary This paper analyses the implementation of the formal truth principle in the Polish civil procedural code in the light of non-monotonic reasoning. The author starts by presenting the concept and applications of non-monotonic reasoning, and the formal truth principle and its place in Polish civil procedure. Next he examines the conditions in which non-monotonicity is admissible in civil court reasoning. While legal reasoning may generally be regarded as non-monotonic due to the assumptions it employs and treats as defensible, the author’s observations on the basis of selected civil law cases lead him to the conclusion that the use of the formal truth principle as a viable instrument in law simply forces courts to make non-monotonic inferences. In other words, adopting this principle means accepting non-monotonic reasoning, or even more: if the court keeps to the formal truth principle it is using one of the types of non-monotonic logic.


Author(s):  
Тимур Султанович Габазов ◽  
Амир Ахметович Мужахаев ◽  
Аминат Аслановна Солтамурадова

В представленной статье кратко раскрывается смысл понятия такого явления, как принцип гражданского процессуального права, а также дана классификация принципов, уже существующих и утвердившихся в теории гражданского процесса. Авторы работы предприняли попытку разработать новую классификацию принципов гражданского судопроизводства, отличную от общепринятой, в которой ключевым фактором выступает субъект, которому эти принципы адресованы по своему содержанию. По результатам проведенного исследования выделены субъекты, которым адресованы действия этих принципов: адресованные только суду; адресованные только лицам, участвующим в деле; - адресованные всем субъектам гражданского судопроизводства в целом (общие). Можно вполне обосновано сказать, что новая классификация принципов гражданского процесса, в зависимости от субъекта имеет право на существование. The presented article briefly reveals the meaning of the concept of such a phenomenon as the principle of civil procedural law, and also gives a classification of the principles that already exist and are established in the theory of civil procedure. The authors of the work attempted to develop a new classification of the principles of civil proceedings, different from the generally accepted one, in which the key factor is the subject to whom these principles are addressed in their content. According to the results of the study, the subjects to whom the actions of these principles are addressed: addressed only to the court; addressed only to persons participating in the case; - addressed to all subjects of civil proceedings in general (general). It can be reasonably said that the new classification of the principles of civil procedure, depending on the subject, has the right to exist.


Author(s):  
Pietro Ortolani

One of the main purposes of private international law is the resolution of conflicts of jurisdiction in civil matters. In the European Union (EU), this goal is pursued by an articulate body of regulations, forming part of what is usually labelled as ‘European procedural law’ or ‘European civil procedure’. In criminal law, by contrast, no such system exists: although Eurojust aims at resolving conflicts of jurisdiction by facilitating the identification of the jurisdiction that should prosecute cross-​border crimes, no hard-​law instrument regulates this matter in a binding fashion.


Author(s):  
Stuart Sime

This chapter considers the modern scope and limitations on the use of the court’s inherent jurisdiction in common law jurisdictions. It considers the underlying juridical basis for the jurisdiction, and the underlying theories, namely that residuary powers were vested in the High Court in England and Wales by the Judicature Acts, and that all courts have inherent powers to prevent abuse of process. It considers the ramifications of the distinction between inherent jurisdiction and inherent powers. Changes in the legal landscape since the seminal articles by Master Jacob and Professor Dockray, including the codification of civil procedure in many common law jurisdictions, and modern understanding of the rule of law and the separation of powers, are considered. It is argued that while existing applications of the inherent jurisdiction should be retained, it is no longer acceptable for the English High Court, and equivalent courts in other jurisdictions, to generate new procedural law by resorting to the inherent jurisdiction.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document