Cassation principles Pleadings — Part Three
Ministry of Justice — Court of Cassation — Technical Office · من 1/10/1972 حتى 31/12/2011 · 3,735 available principles
Search this collectionالمحكمة
Principle 1015Reopening the case for oral argument to submit documents. Within the unrestricted discretion of the court of merits. Failure to mention or grant this request. No deficiency or infringement of the right of defense.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 162- Principle 1016The court disregarding documents or memoranda submitted during the period in which the action was reserved for judgment without the court's permission. This does not vitiate the judgment.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 162
- Principle 1017The judgment’s disregard of documents or memoranda submitted without authorization during the period in which the case was reserved for judgment. Does not render it defective.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 162
- Principle 1018The litigants are the persons concerned with the defenses they advance. Once the action is reserved for judgment, their connection with the litigation is severed except to the extent permitted by the court. The consequenPleadings — Part Three · Source page 162
- Principle 1019The court’s disregard of a document or memorandum submitted by a litigant during the period in which the action was reserved for judgment, without permission to do so. No defect. The basis for that. Example.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 162
- عدم تتبع الخصوم في أقوالهم ومناحي دفاعهم والرد استقلالاً
Principle 1020The court of merits is not obliged to authorize the litigants to submit memoranda when reserving the case for judgment. The condition for this. The court’s disregard of a document or memorandum submitted by a litigant duPleadings — Part Three · Source page 162- عدم اتخاذ المحكمة إجراء إثبات لم يطلب منها ولم تر لزوماً له
Principle 1022Omitting a request to join new parties who were not parties to the action in which the appealed judgment was issued does not vitiate the judgment. Its failure to respond to a manifestly invalid defense. Does not vitiate Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 163- Principle 1023Assessing the evidence in the case and witness statements is within the authority of the court of merits. The condition for that.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 163
- Principle 1024The judgment’s failure to take an evidentiary measure which the litigant did not request and which it, for its part, did not see to. Does not vitiate it. Example.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 163
- Principle 1025Failure to take an investigative measure which the litigant did not request and for which the judgment saw no need. No defect.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 163
- Principle 1026Failure to undertake an evidentiary measure does not vitiate the judgment where the court finds in the papers sufficient material to form its conviction.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 163
- Principle 1027Taking further evidentiary measures. Within the authority of the court of merits. Its refusal to grant the litigants' request to take them or its failure to respond separately to that request. It does not vitiate its judPleadings — Part Three · Source page 163
- Principle 1028The trial court. Its disregard of a request for an evidentiary measure. Does not vitiate the judgment whenever it finds in the case papers sufficient material to form its conviction.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 163
- Principle 1029Examining the evidence and documents and weighing them against one another. Within the authority of the court of merits. It is not open to criticism for declining further evidentiary measures so long as it has based its Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 163
- Principle 1030Assessing and weighing the proofs, evidence, and presumptions submitted in the action. Within the trial court's authority. Its condition. That it base its ruling on tenable reasons. Thereafter, no fault attaches to it foPleadings — Part Three · Source page 164
- Principle 1031The court’s failure to take a measure which was not requested of it and for which it itself saw no reason. No defect.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 164
- Principle 1032No fault attaches to the court if it does not order an evidentiary measure which the litigant did not request and for which the court itself saw no need.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 164
- Principle 1033Assessing the evidence and indications submitted in the action and weighing them against one another. Falls within the trial court's authority. Its condition. That it base its decision on sound reasons. Thereafter, it isPleadings — Part Three · Source page 164
- Principle 1034The court of merits' failure to undertake further evidentiary measures does not vitiate its judgment where it finds in the papers sufficient material to form its conviction.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 164
- Principle 1035The court of merits' undertaking further evidentiary measures. When it is not obliged to do so, grant the parties' request to undertake them, or respond separately to it. - The court of merits' ruling that the document cPleadings — Part Three · Source page 164
- Principle 1036The defence on which the court of the merits is obliged to express an opinion. Its nature. It is a material defence whose acceptance would alter the determination of the action. - Directing litigants to produce evidence Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 164
- Principle 1037Granting or refusing a request for evidentiary investigation. Within the authority of the court of merits. The condition for that. - The appellate court’s express refusal of the request to refer the action for evidentiarPleadings — Part Three · Source page 165
- Principle 1038The existence of a state of mental infirmity requiring interdiction as one of the impediments to legal capacity. A factual matter within the exclusive purview of the court of merits. Its condition. - The judgment’s reliaPleadings — Part Three · Source page 165
- Principle 1039The judgment recording its rejection of the appellant's request to tender an oath to the respondent, considering it ineffectual after the refusal to agree was established by witness statements. No defect.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 165
- Principle 1040Referral for an evidentiary hearing. Not a right of the litigants. The judgment’s disregard thereof. Does not vitiate it. The limit to this.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 165
- Principle 1041Court of merits. It is not obliged to grant a request to refer the action for evidentiary investigation when it finds sufficient material in the action to form its conviction. - The company's contention that the employmePleadings — Part Three · Source page 165
- Principle 1042The court is not at fault for failing to grant a request for further evidentiary measures where it finds in the case papers and documents sufficient material to form its conviction.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 165
- Principle 1043The court of merits. It is not obliged to take further evidentiary measures by appointing another expert or conducting an investigation where it finds in the case papers sufficient material to form its conviction. - 165 Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 165
- Principle 1044The trial court's formation of its conviction from the circumstances of the action and the evidence submitted therein. Its implication. It is not at fault for disregarding a request for referral to evidentiary investigatPleadings — Part Three · Source page 166
- Principle 1045Ascertaining and understanding the facts of the case and assessing the evidence. Within the authority of the court of the merits, which is not obliged to discuss in its judgment every presumption adduced by the litigantsPleadings — Part Three · Source page 166
- Principle 1046The judgment's silence in response to a document and its disregard of a request to appoint an expert. This does not vitiate it. The condition for this.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 166
- Principle 1047A request to conduct an evidentiary investigation is not a right of the litigants. The court may disregard it whenever it finds in the papers sufficient material to form its conviction.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 166
- النعي على الحكم اتخاذه أو عدم اتخاذه رخصة له
Principle 1048A request to conduct an investigation. Not a right of the parties, but a discretionary measure which the court may decline. Its condition. That it find in the papers and documents of the action sufficient material to forPleadings — Part Three · Source page 166- Principle 1049A judgment deeming the action as never having been brought, at the defendant's request, if he was not summoned to appear within the time limit. Not mandatory for the court. An example.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 166
- Principle 1050The court of merits basing its judgment on findings contrary to what is established in the case papers. Invalidates the judgment. An example of the absence of that.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 166
- Principle 1051The defect of contradicting what is established in the papers arises when the judge of the merits disregards facts established by the evidence presented to him. An example of what does not constitute this. - 166 - Civil Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 166
- Principle 1052Deeming the appeal as if it had never been brought. Its condition: failure to observe the time limit for service must be attributable to the plaintiff’s act, and the respondent must request it. Imposing the sanction is dPleadings — Part Three · Source page 167
- Principle 1053The right to impose a custodial sentence or to take the therapeutic measure of placement in a treatment institution where addiction is established, as provided for in Article 33/1, 2 of Law 4 of 1983 concerning the combaPleadings — Part Three · Source page 167
- عدول المحكمة عن إجراء من إجراءات الإثبات الذي أصدرته من تلقاء نفسها
Principle 1054The court's decision to reserve the action for judgment after completion of the litigants' pleadings. Its refusal to grant a request to reopen pleadings in the action. Does not vitiate the judgment. The reason for this. Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 167- Principle 1055The court’s refraining from implementing the order for examination of a party which it issued of its own motion, where it finds in the case papers and evidence sufficient material to form its conviction. No defect.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 167
- الاستخلاص السائغ
Principle 1056Evidentiary procedures. The court may depart from them. The condition for that: its judgment must not have included a conclusive ruling on an issue concerning the admissibility or inadmissibility of proof. - The appellanPleadings — Part Three · Source page 167- Principle 1057Assessing witnesses’ statements and weighing them against one another. Within the exclusive purview of the court of merits. Example.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 168
- Principle 1058Assessing witness statements and weighing them against one another. Within the exclusive discretion of the court of merits. The condition for this.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 168
- Principle 1061Ascertaining the facts of the case and the witnesses’ statements is within the authority of the court of merits. The condition for this.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 168
- Principle 1063Basing a judgment on a ground sufficient to sustain it. Challenging it in respect of the remaining grounds. Ineffectual. Example.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 168
- Principle 1064Disputing the assessment of the evidence upon which the judgment was based and the extent of its sufficiency. A factual argument that may not be raised before the Court of Cassation.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 168
- Principle 1065Argument concerning the authority of the court of the merits to assess evidence. May not be raised before the Court of Cassation.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 168
- Principle 1066Ascertainment of the facts. And assessment of the evidence in the action. Within the power of the court of merits. It may adopt any evidence. It is sufficient that it state the truth on reasonable grounds. - 168 - Civil Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 168
- Principle 1067The judgment based its ruling on several presumptions inferred from the conduct of the litigants and the facts of the case, capable of leading to the conclusion it reached. Disputing this before the Court of Cassation. IPleadings — Part Three · Source page 169
- Principle 1068The trial court may accept only those statements of a witness which it considers truthful. Its acceptance of some of the witness's statements. Does not vitiate its judgment.Pleadings — Part Three · Source page 169