Appeal: incorrect inadmissibility.

Authors

  • Alejandro Abal Oliú Universidad de la República (UdelaR)

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22235/rd.v0i12.1127

Keywords:

formal procedural requirements of procedural acts, procedural acts, control of admissibility of procedural acts, appeal, inadmissibility of recourse of appeal

Abstract

ABSTRACT. Claiming to support the first part of the second article 268 of the C.G.P. subsection, the Supreme Court declares inadmissible the appeal from an interlocutory judgment of second instance, which revoked the first instance resolution that formally declares inadmissible the appeal of the final sentence of first instance (and, thus leading crosses the appeal). The Supreme Court understands that this interlocutory judgment of second instance confirms the definitive judgment of first instance. This position of the Supreme Court of Justice - which is discussed in the article taking the process identified as sui 2-5136/2009-data lacks legal basis and deprives the parties, in contradiction with the provisions of the code, the review in cassation of the interlocutory decisions of second instance which, revoking the decisions of first instance franking a remedy of appeal declare inadmissible — for formal reasons — the resources of appeal of the final judgments of first instance.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Published

2016-04-15

How to Cite

Abal Oliú, A. (2016). Appeal: incorrect inadmissibility. Revista De Derecho, (12), 15–30. https://doi.org/10.22235/rd.v0i12.1127

Similar Articles

<< < 4 5 6 7 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.