当事人没有请求的，宣告法院判决无效，并将案件移送再审

Ars Aequi Pub Date : 2023-04-13 DOI:10.47577/10.1234/arsaequi.12.1.199

Cristina Ramona Duță

{"title":"当事人没有请求的，宣告法院判决无效，并将案件移送再审","authors":"Cristina Ramona Duță","doi":"10.47577/10.1234/arsaequi.12.1.199","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It follows from the constant judicial practice of civil Courts that in Article 480 parag (3) second sentence of de Civile Procedure Code provides for an extrinsic condition for the valdity of the decision by which the Court of appeal refers the case for retrial, namely the existence of an expres request to that effect by at least one of the parties.","PeriodicalId":410800,"journal":{"name":"Ars Aequi","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nullity of the court decision and referral of the case for retrial when the parties do not request such a measure\",\"authors\":\"Cristina Ramona Duță\",\"doi\":\"10.47577/10.1234/arsaequi.12.1.199\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It follows from the constant judicial practice of civil Courts that in Article 480 parag (3) second sentence of de Civile Procedure Code provides for an extrinsic condition for the valdity of the decision by which the Court of appeal refers the case for retrial, namely the existence of an expres request to that effect by at least one of the parties.\",\"PeriodicalId\":410800,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ars Aequi\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ars Aequi\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47577/10.1234/arsaequi.12.1.199\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ars Aequi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47577/10.1234/arsaequi.12.1.199","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

根据民事法院一贯的司法实践，《民事诉讼法》第480条第(3)款第二句规定了上诉法院将案件提交重审所依据的决定的有效性的外在条件，即至少有一方当事人对此提出明确要求。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Nullity of the court decision and referral of the case for retrial when the parties do not request such a measure

It follows from the constant judicial practice of civil Courts that in Article 480 parag (3) second sentence of de Civile Procedure Code provides for an extrinsic condition for the valdity of the decision by which the Court of appeal refers the case for retrial, namely the existence of an expres request to that effect by at least one of the parties.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Ars Aequi

自引率

0.00%

发文量