Contestarea actelor executorului judecătoresc: procedura înaintea primei instanțe
Dispute of the bailiff’s act is that institution- subject of major importance and interest in the civil process. Regulation and use of means offered by this institution undoubtedly contribute in ensuring a fair trial, an effective realization of the adversarial principle, the equality principle and...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
National Institute of Justice
2017-12-01
|
| Series: | Revista Institutului Naţional de Justiţie |
| Online Access: | https://ibn.idsi.md/sites/default/files/imag_file/Contestarea%20actelor%20executorului%20judecatoresc%20procedura%20inaintea%20primei%20instante.pdf |
| _version_ | 1818229796687052800 |
|---|---|
| author | Stratulat Gheorghe |
| author_facet | Stratulat Gheorghe |
| author_sort | Stratulat Gheorghe |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Dispute of the bailiff’s act is that institution- subject of major importance and interest in the civil process. Regulation and use of means offered by this institution undoubtedly contribute in ensuring a fair trial, an effective realization of the adversarial principle, the equality principle and availability of the civil process’ principle. The local doctrine of civil process, though it does not have a solid tradition, it still holds a consistent foundation, determined by the rather rich judicial case law, which is in a continuous process of uniformity and development. Equally significant is the contribution of the legislative amendments, implemented through Law no. 191/2016, which determined a significant impact in the execution of the procedure for disputing the acts of the bailiff, advantages or disadvantages to be achieved in due time. In particular, regarding the introduction of the phrase „court order” instead of the word „judgment”, we mention that, although apparently through this amendment, the legislator wanted the correlation of the notion of „petition”, which is qualified as a request by the party, within a process, with the notion of „order”, which is an intermediate act, issued by the court, until the issuance of the judgment, determining the place of the enforcement procedure as an optional phase of the civil process, however, this change left room for the appearance of different ambiguities, which may appear at the stage of the examination in court of actions related to dispute of the bailiff’s act. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-12T10:24:18Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-86832e087cf1420cb90077217600f50b |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1857-2405 1857-2405 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-12T10:24:18Z |
| publishDate | 2017-12-01 |
| publisher | National Institute of Justice |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Revista Institutului Naţional de Justiţie |
| spelling | doaj.art-86832e087cf1420cb90077217600f50b2022-12-22T00:27:29ZengNational Institute of JusticeRevista Institutului Naţional de Justiţie1857-24051857-24052017-12-011144552Contestarea actelor executorului judecătoresc: procedura înaintea primei instanțe Stratulat Gheorghe0Universitatea de Stat din MoldovaDispute of the bailiff’s act is that institution- subject of major importance and interest in the civil process. Regulation and use of means offered by this institution undoubtedly contribute in ensuring a fair trial, an effective realization of the adversarial principle, the equality principle and availability of the civil process’ principle. The local doctrine of civil process, though it does not have a solid tradition, it still holds a consistent foundation, determined by the rather rich judicial case law, which is in a continuous process of uniformity and development. Equally significant is the contribution of the legislative amendments, implemented through Law no. 191/2016, which determined a significant impact in the execution of the procedure for disputing the acts of the bailiff, advantages or disadvantages to be achieved in due time. In particular, regarding the introduction of the phrase „court order” instead of the word „judgment”, we mention that, although apparently through this amendment, the legislator wanted the correlation of the notion of „petition”, which is qualified as a request by the party, within a process, with the notion of „order”, which is an intermediate act, issued by the court, until the issuance of the judgment, determining the place of the enforcement procedure as an optional phase of the civil process, however, this change left room for the appearance of different ambiguities, which may appear at the stage of the examination in court of actions related to dispute of the bailiff’s act.https://ibn.idsi.md/sites/default/files/imag_file/Contestarea%20actelor%20executorului%20judecatoresc%20procedura%20inaintea%20primei%20instante.pdf |
| spellingShingle | Stratulat Gheorghe Contestarea actelor executorului judecătoresc: procedura înaintea primei instanțe Revista Institutului Naţional de Justiţie |
| title | Contestarea actelor executorului judecătoresc: procedura înaintea primei instanțe |
| title_full | Contestarea actelor executorului judecătoresc: procedura înaintea primei instanțe |
| title_fullStr | Contestarea actelor executorului judecătoresc: procedura înaintea primei instanțe |
| title_full_unstemmed | Contestarea actelor executorului judecătoresc: procedura înaintea primei instanțe |
| title_short | Contestarea actelor executorului judecătoresc: procedura înaintea primei instanțe |
| title_sort | contestarea actelor executorului judecatoresc procedura inaintea primei instante |
| url | https://ibn.idsi.md/sites/default/files/imag_file/Contestarea%20actelor%20executorului%20judecatoresc%20procedura%20inaintea%20primei%20instante.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT stratulatgheorghe contestareaactelorexecutoruluijudecatorescprocedurainainteaprimeiinstante |