Third Parties as the Subjects of Civil Justice

Nino Kharitonashvili

Abstract


The paper considers the development of the third-party institute in civil proceedings and its value for implementation of the right of access to court. It includes comparative analysis of the third parties stipulated in the civil procedures of civil law countries - European Union, Germany, Italy, France and common law countries – UK, USA, Canada and Australia. The article also compares the third persons envisaged in the project “The International Rules of Civil Procedure" of the American Law Institute (ALI) and the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT) and in the Civil Code of Georgia. The paper considers the issue about define the type and quality of influence to be exerted by judgment on persons’ rights to involve them in trial in the Civil Procedures Code of Georgia. The paper suggests introduction of the term ,,intervention” in the Civil Procedure Law of Georgia and differentiation of the kinds of intervention in accordance with the continental (civil) law reflecting the interference of a third party in the civil proceedings. For avoiding intervention of the persons, whose rights and obligations are not impacted by the judgement, the paper, at stipulation of international practice, recommends introduction of the “amicus curiae” procedural mechanism in Civil Procedure Law.


Keywords


Civil Procedure, third person, intervention, amicus curiae.

Full Text:

PDF PDF (Georgian)

References


Association Agreement between the European Union and European Atomic Energy Community and their Member State, of the one part, and Georgia, of the other part 27/06/2014, ratified 18/07/2014, effective 01/07/2016.

Constitution of Georgia, 24/08/1995.

Civil Procedure Code of Georgia, №47-48, 14/11/1997.

Civil Procedure Code of Italy, Book I, T. IV, agg. al 11/03/2013, 105, .

Statute of the court of Justice of the European Union (Consolidated version), EU, Euratom) № 741/2012 of the European Parliament, .

Civil Procedure Code of Germany. 30.01. 1877. Redaction of 12.09.1950, with Changes and Additions to 30.11.2005, Wolters Kluwer, Moscow, 2006.

French Code of Civil Procedure, 1975, Mise A jour Legifrance Le 15 sept. 2003, .

1968 Convention on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, Hague Conference on Private International Law.

1954 Convention on civil procedure, Hague Conference on Private International Law.

Human Rights of European Convention, 04/11/1950.

1905 Convention on Civil Procedure, Hague Conference on Private International Law, 17.06.1905.

Abuse of Procedural Rights: Comparative Standards of Procedural fairness, International Association of Procedural Law International colloquium, Tulane Law School New Orleans, Louisiana edited By M. Taruffo, Kluwer Law International, 27-30 October 1998, 3.

Alarie B.R.D., Green A.J., Interventions at the Supreme Court of Canada: Accuracy, Affiliation and Acceptance, Osgoode Hall Law Journal, Vol. 48, №3/4 (Fall, Winter), 2010, 7, .

Andrews N., Fundamental Principles of Civil Procedure: Order Out of Chaos, University of Cambridge, UK, 2012, 3, .

Baur F., Grunsky W., Zivilprozessrecht, Zehnte, überarbeitete Auflage, Luchterhand, 2000, 5, 6.

Cadiet L., Introduction to French Civil Justice System and Civil Procedural Law, Ritsumeikan Law Review, №28, 2011, 7.

Cappelletti M., Perillo J.M., Civil Procedure in Italy, Springer-Science+Business Media B.V, 1965.

Copyright Litigation Jurisdictional comparisons, General Editors: Thierry Calame, Lenz & Staehelin & Massimo Sterpi, Studio Legale Jacobacci & Associati, 2nd ed.,Thomson Reuters, 2015, 7, .

Eliantonio M., Backes Ch.W., Van Rhee C.H., Spronken T.N.B.M., Berlee A., Standing up for your right(s) in Europe, A Comparative study on Legal Standing (Locus Standi) before the EU and Member States’ Courts, Directorate-General for Internal Policies, Policy Department, Citizen′s Rights and Constitutional Affairs, Legal Affairs, 2012, 4, 5, .

Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP, to assist the court: Third Party Interventions in the Public Interest, May 2016, 9, .

Gottwald P., Comparative Civil Procedure, Ritsumeikan Law Review, International Edition, № 22, 2005, 1, 3, .

Gorelov M.V., Third Parties in Civil Procedures from the View of Centuries, Arbitration and Civil Procedures. 2012, №4, 6 (in Russian).

Grossi S., Pagni M.C., Commentary on the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, Oxford, 2010, 7.

Ilinskaia I.M., The Participation of Third Person in the Civil Procedures of Soviet Union, State Publishing House of Legal Literature, Moscow, 1962, 6 (in Russian).

Joint ALI/UNIDROIT Working Group on Principles and Rules of Transnational Civil Procedure, Prin¬ciples of Transnational Civil Procedure Appendix: Rules of Transnational Civil Procedure (A Reporters’ Study) UNIDROIT 2005 – Study LXXVI – Doc. 13, Rome, 2006, 3, 7, 8, .

Judicial Statutes of the Russian Empire, 1864. Influence on Modern Legislation of Lithuania. Poland. Russia. Ukraina, Finland (To the 150th Anniversary of the Judicial Reform 20,11, 2014), 50, 2006, 3, 7, 8 (in Russian).

Kearney J.D., Merrilli TH.W., The Influence of Amicus Curiae Briefs on the Supreme Court”, 148 U. Pa. L. Rev. 743, 2000, 8.

Kenny S., Justice, Interveners and amici curiae in the High Court (FCA), FedJSchol 1, 2, 1997, 8, .

Kramer X.E., Van Rhee C.H., Civil Litigation in a Globalising World, T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague, The Netherland, 2012, 50, 3, .

Kurdadze S., Khunashvili N., Civil Procedure Law of Georgia, Meridiani, Tbilisi, 2012, 2 (in Georgian).

Liluashvili T., Khrustali V., The Comment to the Civil Procedure Code of Georgia, 2nd ed.,Tbilisi, 2007, 168, 1 (in Georgian).

Luke W., Die Beteiligung Dritter im Zivilprozess, Eine rechtsvergleichende Untersuchung zu Grundfragen der subjektiven Verfahrenskonzentration, Tübingen, 1993, 2.

Melnikov A.A., The Course of Civil Procedure Law of Soviet Union, Theoretical Base of Civil Justice, Book 1, Publishing House ,,Science”, 1981, 5 (in Russian).

Oberhammer P., Domej T., European Traditions in Civil Procedure, edited by Van Rhee C.H., Intersentia Antwerpen – Oxford, 2005, 5.

Prikhodko I.A., Access to Justice in Arbitration and Civil Litigation. St. Petersburg Publishing House of S.-Petersburg state, University, 2005, 345-347.

Prikhodko I.A., Problems of Participation of Individuals in the Arbitration Process, Arbitration Practice, №3, 2005, 2 (in Russian).

Storme M., Approximation of Judiciary Law in the European Union, Nij, Dortrecht, 1994, 3.

Storme M., Towards a Justice with a Human Face, The First International Congress on the Law of Civil Procedure Faculty of Law _ State University of Ghent, 1977, 3, .

Third Party Interventions in the Public Interest, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP, May 2016, 8, .

Van Rhee C.H., Harmonisation of Civil Procedure of Civil Procedure: An Historical and Comparative Perspective, Maastricht University, School of Law, 2011, 3, 6, .

Van Rhee C.H., Harmonisation of Civil Procedure: An Historical and Comparative Perspective, in: Van Rhee C.H., Kramer X.E.(eds.), Civil Litigation in a Globalising World, The Hague: T.M.C. Asser Press/Springer, 2012, 2.

Van Rhee C.H., Civil Procedure, Elgar Encyclopedia of Comparative Law, 2nd ed., 2012, 7, .

Wijffels A., French Civil Procedure (1806-1975), European Traditions in Civil Procedure, Intersentia Antwerpen – Oxford, 2005, 7.

Willmott L., White B., Cooper D., Interveners or Interferers: Intervention in Decisions to Withhold and With¬draw Life-Sustaining Medical Treatment, Sydney Law Review, Vol. 27, 2005, 8, .

West's Encyclopedia of American Law, 2nd ed., Copyright The Gale Group, Inc., 2008, 8, .

Cf Krippendorf v Hyde and another [1884] USSC 59; 110 US 276 at 285 (1883), January 28, 1884.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.