Legal Process Acts: Classification, Requirements, and Effects

Posted on Dec 14, 2024 in Law & Jurisprudence

VIII. Acts of Legal Process

1. Overview

The court process has been conceptualized by Couture, including the sequence or series of events that unfold gradually in order to resolve, through a trial of authority, the dispute submitted to them. It is thus a succession of actions and reactions in which the activity of the subject is a new momentum to get moving.

The process itself is an abstract idea, which should be an external way to channel its development: the procedure. Procedurally, understand the rational and logical system that determines the sequence or series of steps to be taken by the parties and the court for the end of the process. Thus, while the process is the totality or unity, the procedure is the sequence of events in motion, in which every act is linked or coordinated to another act or another group of events, which occur over time continuously.

While every act has a purpose and meets immediate and proper, which describes itself in its individuality, are all aimed at a common object, far, which is the formation of the final act that will summarize the proceedings and their outcome will be individually. Each of these acts that make up the process and ultimate goal is the formation of the final act, known by the name of Legal Acts of Court.

As in civil matters, the procedural legal act done is different from legal proceedings in which the latter is just one event of nature that produces effects in the process. As an example, we can cite the following:

• a) Casualty Case (Article 79 CPC)
• b) Cessation of legal representation (Article 9 CPC)
• c) Physical absence from the territory of the Republic (Articles 11, 284 and 285 CPC)
• d) Death (Articles 77, 396 and 529 TOC, Articles 5, 6 and 165 CPC and Articles 38 and 408 CPP)

2. Concept and Characteristics of Legal Procedure Act

You defined as a legal act issued by the parties, officials of the jurisdiction, or even the third party involved in the process, likely to create, modify or terminate the proceedings. In as defined previously transcribed, which of course is accepted by the chair, we can establish the main elements that distinguish the procedural legal act, namely:

• a) Existence of one or more wills;
• b) The will must be externalized, and
• c) There must be intended to produce effects in the process.

For his part, out of these elements in the background, procedural legal acts are also recognizable by certain characteristics, especially those indicated below:

• a) Are essentially Solemn: This does not mean to be coated with excessive solemnity, but there is always the minimum requirement, the violation carries penalties prescribed by the legislature for each case. For example, demand, procedural and legal act, failure to comply with the requirements contained in Article 254 CPC, will be exposed to the penalty contained in Article 256 CPC or, to its rejection by ineptitude of libel (Article 303 CPC)
• b) Are mainly Unilateral: The expression of will intended to produce effects in the process, usually emanating from a single subject (Former: demand response, judgments, expertise, etc.) Exceptionally, there are acts that the law requires the concurrence of two or more wills to improve them, such as commitment, the transaction, the express extension of competition, etc. These procedural bilateral legal acts are also called Business Legal Proceedings.
• c) Assume and Create Process: The legal acts cannot exist without the process, and the latter cannot exist without them.
• d) They are autonomous: Although in essence are all coordinated towards a common goal involving no linkage to other acts. Thus, one testimony is sufficient unto itself, and requires no religious test for its validity. However, as we have said, although they are autonomous, they are only comprehensible as a unit that pursues the end of the process.

3. Classification of Legal Acts of Court

• a) According to the will necessary for the existence of the Act: There are legal acts unilateral and bilateral process (legal business process)
• b) The subject of whose act: We can distinguish the court acts, acts of third parties and events.
  • i. The Court: They are generally in the procedures which govern the inquisitorial principle. The clearest example are the judgments.
  • ii. De Parties: Under this concept is commonly also include those acts of the third direct. Are the rule in proceedings governed by the principle device (Former: lawsuit, mediation, complaint, etc.).
    • Pulse Procedure: requests by the parties to give effect to the present progressive.
    • Of Application: those in which questions are substantive issues related to the subject matter of the process (EJS: demand, peremptory, comments on the evidence, etc.).
    • Probation: those that are performed to prove the facts underlying the claims and defenses (e.g. examination of witnesses)
    • Of Challenge: acts intended to attack the court, either by defects or defects of form or substance, or because of wrong or cause irreparable harm to either party (e.g. resources)
  • i. Indirect Third Party: are those involved in the process but are detached from the proceedings and lack of interest in it (e.g. experts, receivers, auctioneers, etc.) can be of three kinds:
    • Probation: Basically fall into this class, the report of experts, the testimony of witnesses and summary information.
    • Of Certification: In general, it is those ministers of faith attesting to the effective realization of a fact or act, or materialize (e.g., receptors and secretaries) are acts aimed specifically at other legal validity of the proceedings (Article 61 inc. 3 ° CPC), to record expresses certain events (article 44 CPC), or simply for purposes of proof (Article 427 CPC)
    • Of Opinion: Those in which the court is required or authorized to use the report of a third party (e.g., Public Prosecutor and Public Defender – Article 369 COT) Reports on duty also include in this qualification.

4. Existence and Validity Requirements

In our procedural law, there is no specific regulation of organic and procedural legal acts and should therefore always be applied by extension, the Theory of Legal Act, contained and developed in the relevant articles Civil Code, in all those matters not regulated by procedural codes, and if not in conflict with the nature of the process. In the same vein, we can say that in principle the conditions for the existence and validity of legal acts are the same process that regulates the Civil Code, except for certain characteristics that differentiate them, and discussed below:

• a) The Will and Vices: As in civil matters, the general rule is that the will must be expressed. However, while in civil matters, silence usually has no effect, in procedural matters silence can produce highly relevant legal consequences within the procedure (Former: Articles 78 et seq and 394 CPC, Article 451 and Article 197 CPP COT) The services of the will are the same as in civil matters, but its effects are attenuated:
  • Error: Not necessarily produces the nullity of the act, but leads to other consequences. For example, the error can revoke a confession (Article 402 CPC) Similarly, the generality of the remedies or appeals process, assume ultimate aim to repair mistakes made by the court, but these must necessarily be declared void actions already implemented. Finally, in procedural matters, we see that the penalty is a judicial error compensation for damages paid for by the Treasury (Article 19 No. 7, letter i CPR)
  • Fuerza: less regulated in the codes procedural error, only some references inmates who use similar terminology gives us the idea of force. (Former: CPP Article 483 and Articles 79 and 810 CPC)
  • Dolo: As the force was not considered procedurally as a vice of the will. Hence, according to the civil standard which requires that the fraud is perpetrated by one party, and being legal acts largely unilateral process, its implementation becomes nearly impossible, becoming the fraud, rather than a defect the will, a source of liability (Article 280 inc.2 ° CPC) Nevertheless the doctrine recognizes the process figures such as fraud or fraudulent res judicata, on which the fraud is an offense against good faith. Because of this, our legislation provides a mechanism to destroy these figures, called Action Review (Article 810 CPC)
• a) Procedural Capacity: should be analyzed from two perspectives:
  • Court: With regard to the ability of the court, while the jurisdiction is required for existence, competition is the requirement of validity.
  • II. Parties: Whether it is people legally able or unable to act adequately represented, they all must appear personally in the process, assisted by a person with postulandi ius. Our legislation also establishes certain special disabilities, primarily in criminal matters, whether from the point of view of the active subject (certain people under specific circumstances, are prevented from criminal action – Articles 16 and 17 CPP) or the taxpayer (grounds for insanity based on the minority – Article 10 N ° s 2 & 3 CP)
• a) Object: As in civil matters, the object must be real, definite or ascertainable and lawful. In procedural matters, the object of the act is linked to the idea of legal benefit to be achieved to obtain a legal trial. As for the illegal purpose, we find several cases specifically regulated. As an example, we have jurisdiction for the criminal and non-contentious matters, arbitration cases forbidden, etc.).
• b) Cause: The cause of the procedural legal acts legally relevant is the reason that the performance of official inspires. In all legal proceedings there is a cause, because as we saw when considering the action, and in particular the claim, the interest is essential. Given that interest to give movement to the process, it is clear the need for interest in the various procedural steps in particular. For example, in the appeal, the cause is the injury suffered by the appellant, the sponsorship will be a high-level legal, etc. The cause of procedural legal acts must be lawful, and that ultimately is the notion of cause which we can speak of the responsibility for abuse of process or abuse of legal remedies.
• c) Solemnities: On the solemnity of the procedural legal acts must be understood not only the mechanism by which the act is externalized, but also its location in time and space (place and time). As an expression of the will, the solemnities acquired in this branch of law of fundamental importance since become the guarantee of due process. In general, the forms must be observed, otherwise there is the ineffectiveness of the act for anyone who infringed. However, in some cases, the principle means that the forms are set to fulfill the will of the parties, so they can depart from them. So with the very process that the parties can start or not, replace it with the arbitration, abandon it, etc. Moreover, most lasa nullity procedure are validated during the process itself whether demanded of them in due course. In the end, and out of the formalities that the parties are allowed to alter by express legal provision, it is possible to dispense with any of them, established only in the interests of the parties.

5. Ineffective Legal Acts Proceedings

The legal act procedural fits all your requirements covered by the legal system is effective. On the contrary, the procedural legal act is ineffective, in the broadest sense, when it generates its own purposes or fails to produce them for any reason, be it intrinsic or extrinsic to the act itself. The penalties of inefficiency of the legal proceedings are essentially those established by common law, and other specific procedural law, as discussed below:

• a) None: Sanction resulting from the omission of conditions of existence (e.g. lack of jurisdiction – the lack of court) This sanction becomes relevant since, to the extent that the process is nonexistent, there is no real jeopardy. Furthermore, this sanction cannot be validated, and requires no judicial declaration to allege there is no deadline.
• b) Invalidity: A penalty of inefficiency with respect to those legal acts of the process where it has breached any requirement prescribed by law for its validity (e.g., incompetence of the court) Unlike civil annulment, nullity proceedings is a alone, is neither absolute nor relative. However, it is common to distinguish between procedural invalidity and nullity proceedings.
  • Nullity: That which can be declared ex officio or upon request, for having violated rules that emanate from the public interest (e.g. absolute incompetence.)
  • Annulability: That which can be declared only at the request of a party, for having infringed the rules of a private (e.g. relative incompetence when appropriate extension – may or may not claim)

The nullity procedure generates specific inefficiency measure flawed, (void itself), and in some cases, the acts performed after the process, because there is a direct dependency between them (void extensive or derivative). The derivatively procedural void in itself may be perfectly consistent with law, and will become ineffective only to have been contaminated by the invalidity of the act that preceded it. The typical example of this kind of void is that which comes from the lack of formal notice (Article 83 CPC) Under the principle of protection as a fundamental requirement for the declaration procedure requires that the defect has caused the generation who alleges injury to, which was repaired only with the declaration of invalidity of the act. In addition, the procedural invalidity share the characteristics of civil nullity.

The ways of asserting the invalidity proceedings may be:

• Media Direct: For example, the motion for dismissal or appeal.
• Indirect Means: Resources for reconsideration, appeal or complaint.

The choice of medium depends on the flawed nature of the act, the significance of the irregularity and the timing has claimed.

• a) Unenforceability: The inefficiency of the legal proceedings in respect of third parties, for failure to comply with requirements under the law so that it produces effects on it. The general rule is that the procedural act is only effective against people linked to the process that occurs, or who have taken part in the celebration of a procedural court (Former: Article 177 and Article 185 CPC COT)
• b) Preclusion In the process underpinned by the principle of legal sequential order, estoppel is one of the most relevant sanctions ineffective, and that occurs to the extent that the act is inappropriate in a time trial, or without complying with the order fixed by the legislature.
• c) Other Penalties: Some authors cite as ineffective sanctions for costs, judicial appropriations, desertion, and limitation of resources, the warning, the ineligibility and the abandonment of the procedure. Of these, we believe that the first two, despite being sanctions are not ineffective, and therefore should not be among them.

II. Nature of the Process

Ordinarily, procedural law has been linked to positive law regulating the practice of the courts. This concept essentially static, omits any reference to the eminently dynamic character of this right, derived from the legal experience constituted by the task of the judge, lawyers and parties. It is this second element, one that has been discussed at some length in the literature.

1. Classical Theory

The process of litigation is a contract Contestatio, that is, a voluntary agreement aimed at finding a just solution to the conflict. Later, in the era of the French Revolution, is a second dimension within the classical theory, which considers the process as a quasi contract, in terms of being just a set of legal formulas that lead to resolving the issue.

2. Legal Theory of Value

The second theory about the nature of the process is the so-called doctrine of the legal relationship, supported mainly by authors such as Von Bullow, Chiovenda and Calamandrei. The process is a legal relationship that is filed with the court to order that the applicable law applies to this case, in order to reach a just solution to the conflict. The legal relationship is the essence of the process and pre-law at issue, since it arises at the time the rule of law simply results in a claim. There are mutual rights and obligations between the parties concerned in the proceedings and law enforcement officials to solve it.

3. Theory of the Status

Then appears on the scene the doctrine of the legal situation, which, in accordance with the principles of Goldschmidt, states that no one can speak of legal relationship, as the solution to the conflict is so only a mere expectation of the parties in order to obtain a favorable ruling, so that puts the process on a lower scale, which is the single status.

4. Institution Legal Theory

Fourth place is the doctrine held by the author Jaime Guasp, under which the process is a legal institution to which the parties come when a conflict exists between them to be solved (explained usefulness of the process but not its legal status).

5. Modern Theory of Complex Legal Value

Finally, we find the theory of complex legal relationship, proposed by authors such as Carnelutti, which today enjoys majority acceptance of the doctrine, especially because it applies almost entirely to civil and even criminal proceedings with a difference. Is to establish that the process is a conflict of interest legally relevant, and therefore is subject to special regulation by law, constitute the essence of the fair composition of the litigation.

All the theories set out above, suffer from the error of defining the nature of the process as one that assigns positive law, look to the existence rather than essence. Consequently, in order to clearly identify the process will be necessary to pay attention to the law but not implemented. We will see then that the process is the work process developed by the actors with a view to resolving the conflict.

In view of the chair, the nature of the process is the direct way for solving a dispute according to law, the evolution of the apprehension of legal experience for a trial judge to appreciate to determine its fairness, the progress of a legal thing to his own being by a just man. The process thus understood, is homologous to the jurisdiction, meeting in the same event as the apprehension of the facts and the authority of jurisdicente about his decision and the process in general.

Appears then the race trilogy – judge – trial and a series of similar concepts that need to define and differentiate prior to entering full-depth analysis.