The legal effect of the authority of the preceding judgment : applied study on the Sudanese law for civil procedures 1983

Abstract EN

The study aimed to explain of the concept of the authority of the res judicata between the litigants, analyzing the notion of the validity of the res judicata, and clarifying its concept and conditions, to highlight the legal issues it raises in the Sudanese law of 1983 AD, the study followed the descriptive, comparative, historical, and analytical method.

The study obtains the following results: In the context of the enforcement of arbitration awards, the rules of preclusion do more than just strengthen judicial comity.

They also help promote the finality of international arbitration awards under the Convention, the rules of preclusion differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and the courts in every jurisdiction would be justified in applying their own rules of preclusion, as these rules should be considered as part of the procedural public policy, on the most basic level, the aim of enforcement proceedings is to provide relief for the collection of arbitration awards.

Just as a party seeking to collect a money, damages judgment, a party seeking to enforce an award is not expected to plead the existence of a dispute on the merits and the proceedings for the enforcement of arbitration awards can thus be likened to the proceedings for the collection of monetary judgments, and there has always been wide support for having a uniform system of enforcement for arbitration awards under the Convention.

The study recommended the followings: separating the “principle of the authority of the res judicata” from the “principle of closure”, because of the differences clear distinction between the two principles.

Accordingly, amending the Evidence Law in this regard.

And the text in one article on the different types of closure, except for closure by virtue of a ruling Because it relates to the authenticity of the matter res judicata, and treating the principle of closure as an objective law rule and not just a rule of evidence.