PROBLEMS OF INTERVENTION IN THE CIVIL PROCESS

Nino Kharitonashvili

Abstract


The article considers the origin of the third-party institution in the civil process, its development and value for implementation of the right of access to the court.  It also includes comparative analysis of the third parties stipulated in the project “The International Rules of Civil Procedure" of the American Law Institute (ALI) and the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT), and the third persons as envisaged in the Civil Code of Georgia.

The article analyzes problems of implementation of the third-party institution in judicial practice adducing judicial decision which obviously demonstrate results of inappropriate application of the third-party institution. The decision demonstrates unacceptability of third-party lawsuits with the availability of a decision made on the arguable issue.  The article emphasizes the role of third parties in reopening cases in view of newly discovered facts under the reason that they had not participated in the legal proceedings.

The problem solution recommends assigning a judge with the power to subpoena potential third parties, thus preventing and reducing requirements to reopen cases in view of newly discovered facts.

As a recommendation the article offers to assign the court with an authority to subpoena third persons according to the judge’s initiative, which would promote strengthening of the principle of finality of judgments and advancing the principle of procedural economy.

At stipulation of international practice the article also recommends introducing the amicus curiae procedural mechanism in civil procedural legislation to avoid involvement into civil procedures such parties, rights and obligations of who are not impacted by judgment.

Keywords


Civil Process; third person; interest

Full Text:

PDF>PDF (Russian)

References


ALI/UNIDROIT Working Group on Principles and Rules of Transnational Civil Procedure. (2005). ALI/UNIDROIT Principles of Transnational Civil Procedure Appendix: Rules of Transnational Civil Procedure (A Reporters’ Study), Rome, http://www.unidroit.org/. (p. 37.ENG).

Decision of the Constitutional Court Plenum, 5.11.2013. Case of Israel's citizens - Tamaz Janashvili, Nana Janashvili Janashvili Irma against Parliament of Georgia, (№3 / 1/531/), p. 9.

European Court of Human Rights, 27.05.2010. Second section, Decision # 18156/05, ,,Chichinadze against Georgia, http://www.supremecourt.ge.

European Parliament. (2012). DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES, POLICY DEPARTMENT, CITIZEN′S RIGHTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS. Standing up for your right(s) in Europe, p. 55.

Fleksor, D. С. (1894). Cancellation of decisions with the request of third parties, not involved in the case. St. P-brg., p. 15.

Gorelov, M. B. (2012). Third parties in Civil Procedures from immemorial time. The code of Arbitration and civil procedure. №2, p. 41-43.

Gottwald, P. (2005). Comperative civil procedure. RITSUMEIKAN LAW REVIEW, #22, p. 55.

Grunsky, B. (2000). Zilprozessrecht. Germany. P. 102-104.

Melnikov, A. A. (1981). The course of the Soviet Civil Procedural Law, V. 1. Theoretical bases of justice on civil cases. Publishing house ,,SCIENCE”, Moscow, p. 236.

Prikhodko, I. A. (2005). Accessibility of justice in arbitration and civil proceedings, p. 345 – 347.

van Rhee, C. H. (2005). European Traditions in Civil Procedure, edited by C.H. van Rhee, Interseria Antwerpen – Oxford, P. Oberhammer; T. Domej, p. 103-106.

Qurdadze, Sh., Khunashvili, N. (2012). Еhe Civil Procedure Law. Meridian Publishing, Tbilisi, P. 126.

Storme, M. (2005). A Single Civil Procedure for E urope : A Cathedral Builders’ Dream. RITSUMEIKAN LAW REVIEW, #22, p. 96-97.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2016 Nino Kharitonashvili

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

ISSN (Print) : 2449-7320

ISSN (Online) : 2449-8726