Origin of the application of a fine for reckless and malicious defendant's lawyers conduct. - Microjuris - Argentina
1.- As the defendant attorney unreasonably prolonged the process raising exceptions that were rejected in both instances and even in the Lump continued to deny facts that were extensively tested, corresponding fined for procedural misconduct, for his reckless and malicious actions were contrary to the duties of loyalty, integrity and good faith.
2.-impose sodesp a sanction in terms of art. 45 of the Code does not mean undermining the principle of defense in court, or other protected in the Constitution, but tries to suppress cases of judicial sodesp misconduct using the powers granted by the legislature, whose purpose is to avoid unnecessary use of judicial activity in which the first victim is the judge, who is trying to divert on task intended to give a fair sentence, by the proposition of unfounded issues.
3.- The rating judge reckless or malicious conduct must be done in strict order not to impede the due exercise of the constitutional guarantee of defense at trial as guaranteed by Article criterion. sodesp 18 of the CN., But skip this warranty also has limits. Under the constitutional invocation can not use the process as a means consecration of bad faith.
In the City of Buenos Aires, capital of Argentina, the 27th day of November Two Thousand Fourteen, meeting Agreement Lords Justices sodesp of the National Court of Civil Appeals, to know in the appeal filed in cars captioned: "RP SA C / MEC AND OTHER S / DAMAGES" on the judgment of fs. 150/154, the Court established the following question to resolve:
I. The sentence of fs. 150/154 upheld the application condemning both defendants to pay the plaintiff the sum of $ 126,420, plus interest and costs. Upheld the order of sanctions made fs. 114 and sentenced powered lawyers and their parents to pay the plaintiff the amount of $ 12,642 in fines. It regulated the fees of the professionals involved.
They presented their complaints to fs. 179/180, with adherence to fs. 181, which deserved replica fs. 185/188. They complain that the judge a quo has imposed sanctions because they understand that their procedural behavior can not be described as reckless or malicious. Furthermore, the Court of Discipline of the College is the only body empowered to sanction lawyers.
II. This old well-known story of the court originates in an eviction that I have in view, equally sodesp cover those present, in which the eviction of the property of RVP 450, 2nd floor, Dpto.3 sodesp of this city is haunted.
Raised the objection of lack of personality and the defense of lack of standing, the first was rejected as special preliminary ruling and upheld by this Court in December 2008.
A fs. 179/180 judge granted the application and fs. 202/203, with preopinante vote here who resumed the same function, confirmed the statement. I told fs. 203 having been resolved prior lack of personality, he could not help externalize my real surprise sodesp "that a lawyer can insist to try to grieve for their conviction sodesp reiterating a defense that has already been settled and ... reiterating in this procedural stage that the exception "should thrive as" except falta ". sodesp With respect to the following two paragraphs sodesp I refer to the judgment for his eloquence and unfortunately the advice went unheeded locked.
Although presumably was not so boldly, to answer the complaint CEM, represented by NMMvolvió sodesp to oppose the exception of lack of Personaría founded in same arguments previously put forward.
Issuance of the final judgment, appellants are the only sanctioned lawyers, arguing, among other absurdities, the limitation of defenses in the previous eviction, without considering sodesp that processed through sodesp the regular process and no limit on the test because sodesp it is based on the causal intrusion
It should first be noted that the reckless behavior is configured when litigating convinced of the lack of reason and knowing that do not have legal protection, and is malicious when used to process against their purposes, hindering their course (Conf. Fenochietto -Arazi, the Code ..., Volume 1, pp. 188 ff.).
Malice is the procedural misconduct manifested in formulating requests destined exclusively to obstruct the normal development of the process or delay its decision (Conf. Palacio, Lino, "Civil Litigation", Volume III, p.
MORE
1.- As the defendant attorney unreasonably prolonged the process raising exceptions that were rejected in both instances and even in the Lump continued to deny facts that were extensively tested, corresponding fined for procedural misconduct, for his reckless and malicious actions were contrary to the duties of loyalty, integrity and good faith.
2.-impose sodesp a sanction in terms of art. 45 of the Code does not mean undermining the principle of defense in court, or other protected in the Constitution, but tries to suppress cases of judicial sodesp misconduct using the powers granted by the legislature, whose purpose is to avoid unnecessary use of judicial activity in which the first victim is the judge, who is trying to divert on task intended to give a fair sentence, by the proposition of unfounded issues.
3.- The rating judge reckless or malicious conduct must be done in strict order not to impede the due exercise of the constitutional guarantee of defense at trial as guaranteed by Article criterion. sodesp 18 of the CN., But skip this warranty also has limits. Under the constitutional invocation can not use the process as a means consecration of bad faith.
In the City of Buenos Aires, capital of Argentina, the 27th day of November Two Thousand Fourteen, meeting Agreement Lords Justices sodesp of the National Court of Civil Appeals, to know in the appeal filed in cars captioned: "RP SA C / MEC AND OTHER S / DAMAGES" on the judgment of fs. 150/154, the Court established the following question to resolve:
I. The sentence of fs. 150/154 upheld the application condemning both defendants to pay the plaintiff the sum of $ 126,420, plus interest and costs. Upheld the order of sanctions made fs. 114 and sentenced powered lawyers and their parents to pay the plaintiff the amount of $ 12,642 in fines. It regulated the fees of the professionals involved.
They presented their complaints to fs. 179/180, with adherence to fs. 181, which deserved replica fs. 185/188. They complain that the judge a quo has imposed sanctions because they understand that their procedural behavior can not be described as reckless or malicious. Furthermore, the Court of Discipline of the College is the only body empowered to sanction lawyers.
II. This old well-known story of the court originates in an eviction that I have in view, equally sodesp cover those present, in which the eviction of the property of RVP 450, 2nd floor, Dpto.3 sodesp of this city is haunted.
Raised the objection of lack of personality and the defense of lack of standing, the first was rejected as special preliminary ruling and upheld by this Court in December 2008.
A fs. 179/180 judge granted the application and fs. 202/203, with preopinante vote here who resumed the same function, confirmed the statement. I told fs. 203 having been resolved prior lack of personality, he could not help externalize my real surprise sodesp "that a lawyer can insist to try to grieve for their conviction sodesp reiterating a defense that has already been settled and ... reiterating in this procedural stage that the exception "should thrive as" except falta ". sodesp With respect to the following two paragraphs sodesp I refer to the judgment for his eloquence and unfortunately the advice went unheeded locked.
Although presumably was not so boldly, to answer the complaint CEM, represented by NMMvolvió sodesp to oppose the exception of lack of Personaría founded in same arguments previously put forward.
Issuance of the final judgment, appellants are the only sanctioned lawyers, arguing, among other absurdities, the limitation of defenses in the previous eviction, without considering sodesp that processed through sodesp the regular process and no limit on the test because sodesp it is based on the causal intrusion
It should first be noted that the reckless behavior is configured when litigating convinced of the lack of reason and knowing that do not have legal protection, and is malicious when used to process against their purposes, hindering their course (Conf. Fenochietto -Arazi, the Code ..., Volume 1, pp. 188 ff.).
Malice is the procedural misconduct manifested in formulating requests destined exclusively to obstruct the normal development of the process or delay its decision (Conf. Palacio, Lino, "Civil Litigation", Volume III, p.
MORE
No comments:
Post a Comment