In a pandemic, the court could not regulation in a jury-involved lineup. In the event of an infringement of the anti-covid rules and the judgement of divorce in an enlarged composition (with jurors), the proceedings before him were declared invalid, the ultimate Court stated.
Specifically, it was request for divorce without ruling his wife’s guilt, but the husband’s consequence resulted in the initiation of proceedings, for although he agreed to divorce, he demanded that he be judged by his wife. After the Court of First Instance ruled the divorce by the plaintiff, which prompted the spouse to appeal, the case was dealt with by the Court of Appeal.
The procedural problem arose erstwhile it was found that, in the course of the case, the composition of the court was not in accordance with the law. By order of the Vice-President of the territory Court, it was decided to consist of 1 justice and 2 jurors, which was contrary to the anti-covid regulations in force during the outbreak. According to them, the court of First Instance could have examined cases in the composition of 1 judge, with the anticipation of ordering the composition of 3 judges in the event of a peculiar complexity or precedent of the case.
The Court of Appeal, being aware of the non-compliance of the court with the rules, asked the ultimate Court a question of the consequences of specified formation. The ultimate Court has expressly stated that, in divorce cases, both those not completed until July 2021 and those commenced between July 2021 and April 2023, the First Court of First Instance should regulation in the composition of 1 justice unless the president of the Court decides otherwise. Where the composition of 1 justice and 2 jurors decides, the proceedings shall be deemed invalid. As a result, the divorce process will should be reopened.
Legal basis: Resolution of the ultimate Court of 14 December 2023, act No. III CZP 32/23
Dear reader, we remind you that all legal matters in this substance we compose about can be complicated and frequently require the aid of a lawyer. It's worth discussing it with a lawyer before taking legal action.
Contact us now. We'll review your case and see precisely what we can do about you. Our experts have already helped a number of clients who thought they were already in an impossible situation.
Attention! This article should be considered as a clue, a hint, not a prescription, how to solve your own problem. The legal opinion has no binding power for offices, courts, so we urge that legal matters be consulted straight with a lawyer. Each case is different and requires individual analysis.
Write us or call us now.
579-636-527
Contact@legartis.pl
Daniel Głogowski
Publicist, author and social activist. The first articles were published in 1999 for global publishers. For more than 30 years, he has gained his experience through cooperation with the largest editorial offices. In his articles, he sought to address controversial themes and present first viewpoints that allowed for a deeper knowing of the issues discussed. Over the years, he gained a reputation as a reliable journalist. Contact: kontakt@legaartis.pl
Here’s Law all Day,News from the Country,Events of the Day, Divorce,Sn,Emphasis,Based Sentence-related post from
Divorce judgement invalidated reason for besides much ruling:
