La posible y necesaria perentoriedad de los plazos de apelación contra una sentencia «pro vinculo»
Since the reform of marriage nullity causes came into effect in 2015, the consensus has been that the peremptory nature of the time limits for introducing and pursuing an appeal applies only to pro nullitate judgments, not- to pro vinculo judgments that may be subject to later appeal. From an exeget...
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Espagnol |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | En cours de chargement...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
HeinOnline
2023
|
| Dans: |
Ius canonicum
Année: 2023, Volume: 63, Numéro: 125, Pages: 143-180 |
| Sujets non-standardisés: | B
Apelación
B Carga epistémica B Cosa juzgada |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Résumé: | Since the reform of marriage nullity causes came into effect in 2015, the consensus has been that the peremptory nature of the time limits for introducing and pursuing an appeal applies only to pro nullitate judgments, not- to pro vinculo judgments that may be subject to later appeal. From an exegetical, historical and dogmatic point of view, there are good reasons to hold that pro vinculo judgments also benefit from the peremptory nature of time limits for appeals. The peremptory status of such pro vinculo judgments is possible de iure condito, and both necessary and desirable de iure condendo. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2254-6219 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: Ius canonicum
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.15581/016.125.003 |