الأحكام المتناقضة في الدعوى المدنية الواحدة في القانون الأردني : دراسة مقارنة

العناوين الأخرى

Contradictory provisions in a single civil lawsuit in Jordanian law : a comparative study

مقدم أطروحة جامعية

الحسابين، ولاء أحمد علي

مشرف أطروحة جامعية

الشوابكة، هيام محمود حرب

الجامعة

جامعة الإسراء

الكلية

كلية الحقوق

دولة الجامعة

الأردن

الدرجة العلمية

ماجستير

تاريخ الدرجة العلمية

2018

الملخص الإنجليزي

This study dealt with a controversial issue in which the dispute was not resolved yet, namely, challenging the issuance of two contradictory rulings according to the Jordanian Civil Procedure Law.

In particular, the Jordanian legislator was not clear in the legal organization to challenge the contradictory provisions.

He went to challenge the contradictory provisions in two ways, He took the privilege of retrial to challenge these provisions in one case, where he went in Article (198/3) with distinction and article (213/8) to retrial.

The study discussed jurisprudential jurisprudence as well as the relevant legal texts on the subject, and the decisions of the Court of Cassation by defining contradictory provisions and their image, The provisions that fall outside its scope, the validity of the judgment contrary to a previous judgment, the guarantees limiting its issuance, the conditions of appeal, and the means or means of appeal in accordance with the law.

This is reflected in the jurisprudential position of the contradictory provisions, the validity of the subsequent judgment of a final ruling, and the preventive measures that have been found to limit or reduce the contradiction of the provisions, explaining the extent of their violation of these guarantees, according to a comparative study with the Egyptian Code of Procedure.

The Jordanian legislator on this subject, the Egyptian legislator has only one way to challenge, which is the way of the veto, and through my research on the subject and found some other legislation that did not recognize the subsequent rule from the beginning, The researcher concluded that there is no contradiction between the texts regulating the methods of appeal against contradictory provisions, and that both texts have scope for application.

The legislator provided for the way to challenge the retrial in respect of contradictory provisions, in order to give the opponents, the opportunity to challenge the provisions that do not accept appeal by discrimination according to the provisions of Article 198/3).

The legislator had to clarify the scope of application of each of the articles, so that there was no ambiguity in the subject of these provisions, since I found that the legislator was right, so that it gave the opponents the opportunity to challenge contradictory and non-discriminatory provisions by challenging them by retrial In accordance with paragraph 8 of Article 213 of the Jordanian Civil Procedure Law, and the principles of justice and equity were laid down more than the Egyptian legislator.

التخصصات الرئيسية

القانون

الموضوعات

• القانون
• الأردن
• الدعوى

عدد الصفحات

90

قائمة المحتويات

• APA
• MLA
• AMA

لغة النص

العربية

نوع البيانات

رسائل جامعية

رقم السجل

BIM-890623