Decăderea din dreptul la probe sau atunci când „şi mâine e o zi” devine „timpul nu mai avea răbdare”... cu justiţiabilii. Câteva aspecte practice
Forfeiture of the right to submit evidence, or when “tomorrow is another day” becomes “time no longer waits”... for litigants. Some practical considerations

Summary/Abstract: Forfeiture is intended to ensure the general rule enshrined in the Code of Civil Procedure, namely the speed of civil proceedings, fulfilling two functions in this regard: a preventive one – i.e. the parties are informed through the relevant legal provisions of the consequences that may arise in the event of failure to comply with the mandatory time limits and a punitive one – i.e. the party that has not exercised its procedural right within the legal or court set time limit loses that right. The central pillar of the rules of evidence in the first instance trial phase is Article 254 of the Civil Procedure Code. It establishes a rule of disarming clarity: evidence must be proposed, under penalty of forfeiture, by the plaintiff in the statement of claim and by the defendant in the answer, unless the law provides otherwise, the logic of the legislator being one of speed and predictability. This study analyses several practical aspects in which the penalty of forfeiture can be avoided when the parties to the proceedings, for various reasons, more or less relevant, do not submit within the time limit the evidence they intend to use in formulating their claims or defences.

• Details
• Contents