the judicial attempt at conciliation: the new section 185-bisof the italian code of civil procedure
Abstract
This article focuses on recent reforms of the Italian Civil Procedure Code through which a new section 185-bis had been added, providing that the Judge, at the first hearing or until the termination of the evidence-taking phase of the proceedings, may suggest to the parties a settlement or conciliation proposal, when appropriate to the nature and the value of the dispute and the issues of prompt solution at law.
The author’s intent is, on the one hand, to identify the rationale of the new rule and, on the other hand, to emphasize that unfortunately the new rule does not reverse misfortunes of Italian civil justice, but rather gives rise to many difficulties of interpretation.With this purpose, this article first investigates the distinctive traits of the various attempts at conciliation contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, taking into consideration not only the current version of the rules but also the provisions which have followed one another over time. It follows a detailed examination of the elements of the proposal under sect. 185-bis, as to the timeframe, its discretional or mandatory nature, sanctions for the party’s unjustified refusal as well as the role of the Judge with respect to his or her decision-making function.
The author’s intent is, on the one hand, to identify the rationale of the new rule and, on the other hand, to emphasize that unfortunately the new rule does not reverse misfortunes of Italian civil justice, but rather gives rise to many difficulties of interpretation.With this purpose, this article first investigates the distinctive traits of the various attempts at conciliation contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, taking into consideration not only the current version of the rules but also the provisions which have followed one another over time. It follows a detailed examination of the elements of the proposal under sect. 185-bis, as to the timeframe, its discretional or mandatory nature, sanctions for the party’s unjustified refusal as well as the role of the Judge with respect to his or her decision-making function.
Access
Citation
ID:
143208
References
Blockchain Verification
Account:
NFT Contract Address:
0x95644003c57E6F55A65596E3D9Eac6813e3566dA
Article ID:
143208
Unique Identifier:
10.17589/2309-8678-2014-2-3-80-95
Network:
Scimatic Chain (ID: 481)
Loading...
Blockchain Readiness Checklist
Authors
Abstract
Journal Name
Year
Title
Creates 1,000,000 NFT tokens for this article
Token Features:
- ERC-1155 Standard NFT
- 1 Million Supply per Article
- Transferable via MetaMask
- Permanent Blockchain Record
Scan with Saymatik Web3.0 Wallet