Herald of Civil Procedure
EN
main-photo

We in a citing index:

Grounds for Suspension the Enforcement of Judicial Decisions of Courts of First Instance and Appeal in a Higher Court on Review of the Case (the Experience of Germany)

P.N. Makarov,
Senior Consultant of the Department of Public Law and Process 
of the Supreme Commercial «Arbitrazh» Court of the Russian Federation


The article examines the conditions under which in the FRG’s civil proceedings can be allowed the suspension in enforcement of judicial decisions of courts of first instance and appeal in the case of appeal to the court and procedure for resolution of the court to the suspension of enforcement. He basis of the legal regulation of the problem was based on the following idea: a suspension of the court of enforcement should be permitted only in exceptional cases. It is believed that such a provision does not violate the equitable interests of the debtor, as his case was considered on the merits and in two instances, respectively and there is a strong likelihood that the case made the right decision. At the same time facilitating the debtor is an opportunity of suspension of the court of enforcement and further delaying, the satisfaction of creditors unjustly infringed in the interests of the latter and providing a creditor to exercise their right to be heard. Lender must be notified of the petition of the debtor and he should be given the sufficient time to prepare and the opportunity to present their position on the issue. In cases of urgency, the court may without giving to the creditor the opportunity to be heard to suspend enforcement of the judgment. He order should be immediately sent to the parties. It is subject to cancellation (change) of the implementation of the creditor of his right to be heard (after the adoption of the order), the court finds no grounds for suspending the execution of the judgment. 

Keywords: German civil procedure; suspending enforcement of judicial decisions of courts of first instance and appeal when reviewing the case by a higher court.

References 

    Gotz G. in: Münchener Kommentar zur Zivilprozeßordnung: mit Gerichtsverfas- sungsgesetz und Nebengesetzen: In 2 Bde. Bd. 2 /       Bearb. von J. Braun, M. Brinkmann, J. Damrau et al.; Hrsg. von W. Kruger, T. Rauscher. 4. Aufl. München: C.H. Beck, 2012. 
   Münzberg W. in: Stein/Jonas Kommentar zur Zivilprozeßordnung. In 10 Bde. Bd. 7 / Bearb. von C. Berger, R. Bork, W. Brehm et al. – 22. Aufl. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002. 
   Lackmann R. in: Kommentar zur Zivilprozessordnung: mit Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz / Bearb. von W. Ball, U. Becker, H. Borth et al.; Hrsg. von H.-J. Musielak. 10., neubearb. Aufl. München: Vahlen, 2013. 

 Information about the author 
 
  Makarov P.N. (Moscow) – Senior Consultant of the Department of Public Law and Process of the Supreme Commercial «Arbitrazh» Court of the Russian Federation (101000, Moscow, Center, Maly Kharitonievsky Lane, 12, e-mail: [email protected]).

 el_.png   it_.png   book.png

P.N. Makarov