Post by account_disabled on Dec 31, 2023 4:34:07 GMT -5
Athe provisions of art. of the Code of Civil Procedure provisions which have the following content The plaintiff may amend his request and propose new evidence under penalty of forfeiture only up to the first term to which he is legally cited. In this case the court orders the postponement of the case and the communication of the amended request to the defendant in order to formulate the response which under the penalty of forfeiture will be submitted at least days before the set deadline to be investigated by the plaintiff in the case file.
However no deadline will be given but the verbal statements Country Email List made in court will be included in the conclusion of the session when the material mistakes in the content of the application are corrected the claimant increases or decreases the amount of the object of the request the counter value of the object of the request lost or destroyed during the process is requested a request for confirmation is replaced by a request for realization of the right or vice versa when the request for confirmation is admissible. Modification of the summons application beyond the term provided for in para. can only take place with the express consent of all parties.
In the opinion of the author of the exception of unconstitutionality the criticized legal provisions violate the constitutional provisions contained in art. para. regarding the principle of equality before the law art. para. regarding the right to a fair trial and art. para. regarding the administration of justice. Examining the exception of unconstitutionality the Court notes that the author of the exception starts from an erroneous premise that according to which regardless of whether the plaintiff amends his summons request or not the response a term that runs from on the date of receipt of the summons. Or from the corroborated analysis
However no deadline will be given but the verbal statements Country Email List made in court will be included in the conclusion of the session when the material mistakes in the content of the application are corrected the claimant increases or decreases the amount of the object of the request the counter value of the object of the request lost or destroyed during the process is requested a request for confirmation is replaced by a request for realization of the right or vice versa when the request for confirmation is admissible. Modification of the summons application beyond the term provided for in para. can only take place with the express consent of all parties.
In the opinion of the author of the exception of unconstitutionality the criticized legal provisions violate the constitutional provisions contained in art. para. regarding the principle of equality before the law art. para. regarding the right to a fair trial and art. para. regarding the administration of justice. Examining the exception of unconstitutionality the Court notes that the author of the exception starts from an erroneous premise that according to which regardless of whether the plaintiff amends his summons request or not the response a term that runs from on the date of receipt of the summons. Or from the corroborated analysis