Chapter I General Provisions
Article 1 The object of a civil trial before a court is to prosecute or to vindicate rights of natural or legal person or to declare juridical facts.
Article 2 The High Court of Justice is competent to hear any civil case.
Chapter II The Parties in a Case
Article 3 Anyone can act in a civil trial; however, the respondent who has been legitimately cited must answer.
Although a petitioner or respondent has appointed an advocate, they themselves are nevertheless bound to be present in person at the trial when the law or the court prescribes it.
The following may stand in a trial only through a curator:
(1) persons who have not attained the age of fourteen years;
(2) persons who are under suspension of their civil rights;
(3) persons who shall lack the use of reason; or
(4) absentees;
provided that the curator shall be appointed by the High Court on recommendation of the Minister of Justice.
Legal persons stand trial through their legal representatives; provided that the Empire stands through the Minister of Justice.
Article 4 A party can freely appoint an advocate and terminate the mandate given to him.
No person may be appointed an advocate unless he or she is of good reputation and able to stand personally in a civil trial.
Chapter III Actions and Exceptions
Article 5 Every right whatsoever is safeguarded not only by an action but also by an exception unless something contrary is expressly stated by an Act.
Article 6 Every action is terminated through prescription in accord with an Act; however, actions concerning the status of a person is never terminated; provided that an exception is always available.
Article 7 A petitioner can bring the respondent to court by several actions at the same time provided that they do not conflict among themselves and if they do not exceed the competence of the court approached.
Article 8 A respondent can file a counter-claim action against a petitioner before the same court in the same trial either due to a connection of a case with the principal action or to remove or lessen the charge of the petitioner; provided that a counter-claim to the counter-claim is not admissible.
Chapter IV The Introduction of the Case
Article 9 A court cannot adjudicate any case unless the party concerned has presented a petition in accord with this Act.
Article 10 A person who wishes to bring another to court must present a petition to a competent court, which explains the object of the controversy and request the service of the court.
Article 11 A petition which introduces a suit must:
(1) express before which court the case in being introduced, what is being petitioned and by whom the petition is being made;
(2) indicate the basis for the petitioner's right and at least in general the facts and proofs which will be used to prove what has been alleged;
(3) be signed by the petitioner or his or her advocate, adding the day, month and year, as well as the address of the petitioner or advocate; and
(4) indicate the name and domicile of the respondent.
Article 12 After the court has recognized both that the matter is within its competence and that the petitioner does not lack legitimate personal standing in trial, the court must as soon as possible accept or reject the petition by an order.
A petition may be rejected only:
(1) if the court is incompetent;
(2) if it is undoubtedly clear that the petitioner lacks legitimate personal standing;
(3) if the prescriptions of Article 11 of this Act have not been observed; or
(4) if from the petition itself it is certainly obvious that is lacks any basis whatsoever and that is impossible that any such basis would appear through a process.
If the petition has been rejected due to defects, which can be corrected, the petitioner can properly draw up a new petition and again present it to the same court.
Article 13 In the order which accepts the petition the court must either call into court or cite the other parties for the joinder of issues, determining whether they must respond in writing or present themselves personally before the court in order to join the issues.
Article 14 The order of citation to the trial must be forwarded immediately to the respondent.
Article 15 The joinder of issues (contestatio litis) occurs when the terms of the controversy based on the petitions and responses of the parties are specified by the order of the court.
Article 16 The order of the joinder of issues is to be made known to the parties; unless they have already reached an agreement, they can within ten days make recourse to the court that it be changed.
Article 17 Once the terms of the controversy have been determined, they cannot validly be changed except for serious reasons through a new order at the request of one party and after hearing the other parties and considering their reasons.
Article 18 Once the joinder of issues has occurred, the court is to furnish the parties suitable time to present and complete proofs.
Chapter V Prosecution of the Suit
Article 19 The prosecution of a civil suit begins with the citation; it ends, unless it is otherwise provided by an Act, with the pronouncement of a definitive judgment.
Article 20 If the litigating party dies, changes status or ceases to exist, and the case is not completed, its prosecution is suspended until the heir, the successor or an interested person resumes the suit.
Article 21 If a curator or advocate who is necessary ceased from office, the prosecution of the suit is suspended in the interim; however, the court shall appoint new curator immediately.
Article 22 If no procedural act is proposed by the parties for six weeks, the prosecution of the suit is abated.
Article 23 A petitioner may renounce the instance at any stage of the trial.
Chapter VI Proofs
Article 24 The burden of proof rests upon the person who makes the allegation.
Article 25 The following do not need proof:
(1) matters which are presumed by the law itself;
(2) facts alleged by one of the contending parties and admitted by the other unless proof is nonetheless demanded by the law or the court.
Article 26 Proofs of any type, whatever which seem useful for deciding the case and which are licit can be adduced, provided that if a party insists that a proof rejected by the court be admitted, the court is to determine the matter most expeditiously.
Article 27 Except for a serious cause, the court is not to proceed to gather proofs before the joinder of issues.
Article 28 The court may always interrogate the parties so as to reveal the truth more effectively; the court must do so at request of a party or to prove a fact which is to be established beyond doubt for the sake of the public interest.
A party legitimately interrogated must answer and tell the whole truth; provided that if a party has refused to answer, it is for the court to evaluate what can be drawn from that refusal concerning the proof of the facts.
The parties can present to the court items on which a party is to be interrogated.
A declaration of a party lacks all probative force if it is proved that it was made through an error of fact or it was extorted by force or grave fear.
Article 29 In every type of trial, proof by means of both public and private documents is admitted.
Public documents are:
(1) those which official persons have drawn up in the exercise of their functions after having observed the formalities prescribed by law;
(2) those which are considered to be such by an Act;
provided that all other documents are considered private.
Unless contrary and evident arguments show otherwise, public documents are to be trusted concerning everything, which is directly affirmed in them.
The probative force of the private documents is to be determined by the court.
Documents do not have probative force in a trial unless they are originals or presented in authentic copy and are deposited with the court so that it and the opposing party may examine them.
Article 30 Proof by means of witness is admitted in any kind of case under the supervision of the court.
When the court interrogates the witnesses they must tell the whole truth.
All persons can be witnesses; provided that those who are present in the trial as judicial officers, parties or their advocates may not be witnesses in the case.
When proof by means of witnesses is demanded, their names and domicile are to be made known to the court; provided that the citation of a witness is done by an order of the court made known to the witness and a witness who has been duly cited is to appear before the court or to inform it of the reason of his or her absence.
Witnesses must be examined at the court.
Each of the witnesses must be examined individually; provided that if the witnesses disagree among themselves or with a party in a serious matter, the court can bring them together.
The examination of a witness is conducted by the court; provided that if the parties or their advocates who are present at the examination have further questions to be put to the witness, they are to propose those questions not to the witness but to the court who is to ask them.
The court, first of all, is to establish the identity of the witness; the court should seek out what is the relationship of the witness with the parties, and, when addressing specific question to the witness regarding the case, the court is also to inquire about the sources of the witness' knowledge and the precise time the witness learned what is asserted.
The questions are to be brief, accommodated to the intelligence of the person being interrogated, not comprising several points at the same time, not captious, not crafty, nor suggestive of the answer, free from every kind of offense and pertinent to the case being tried.
Witnesses are to give testimony orally or in writing and the court records the testimony.
In evaluating testimony the court should consider:
(1) the condition and good reputation of the witness;
(2) whether the witness testifies in virtue of personal knowledge, especially what has been seen and heard personally, or whether the testimony is the witness' opinion, or a rumor or hearsay from others;
(3) whether the witness is reliable and firmly consistent or rather inconsistent, uncertain or vacillating;
(4) whether the witness has supporting witnesses or whether there is support from other sources of proof.
The deposition of a single witness cannot constitute full proof unless a witness acting in an official capacity makes a deposition regarding duties performed ex officio or unless circumstances of things and persons suggest otherwise.
Article 31 An expert is a person who is learned, experienced and skilled in a science or profession and whose report is required either to prove some fact or to diagnose the true nature of something.
It is the responsibility of the court either to name experts after listening to the parties and the names they propose, or to make use of reports, if warranted, already drawn up by other experts.
The court is to specify by an order the individual points on which the expert's services must focus.
The experts must indicate clearly by what documents or other apt means they have been informed about the identity of persons, things or places, by what path and method they proceeded in discharging the function given to them and on what grounds, for the most part, their conclusions are based.
An expert may be summoned by the court to supply further explanations, which may seem necessary.
The court is to weigh attentively not only the conclusions of experts, even when they are concordant, but also the other circumstances of the case.
Article 32 If in order to settle a case the court considers it opportune to have access to a given place or to inspect something, this should be specified in an order which describes in summary fashion those elements which must be exhibited at the access of the court.
Article 33 A presumption is a probable conjecture about an incertain matter; provided that a presumption is either legal or judicial.
A person who has a favorable presumption established by law is freed from the burden of proof, which then devolves upon the other party.
The court is not to formulate presumptions that are not determined by law unless they arise from a certain and determined fact that is directly connected with the subject matter of the controversy.
Subject to the precedent paragraph, a judicial presumption, when formulated by an order of the court, has the same effect as a legal presumption.
Chapter VII Conclusion of the Case
Article 34 When everything pertinent to the production of proofs has been completed, it is time for the conclusion of the case.
Article 35 The conclusion takes place whenever the parties declare that they have nothing more to add, or the time set by the court for proposing proofs has expired, or the court declares that the case is sufficiently instructed.
Article 36 The court is to issue an order that the conclusion of the case has been completed, in whatever manner it took place.
Article 37 After the conclusion of the case, the court is to determine an appropriate period of time for the presentation of defense briefs and observations.
Article 38 Each party has the right to reply to a defense brief or observation of the other one.
Chapter VIII The Pronouncements of the Courts
Article 39 After the case has been tried in a judicial manner, it is settled by the court by a judgment.
Article 40 For the pronouncement of the judgment, there must be in the mind of the court moral certitute regarding the matter to be settled by the judgment.
The court must derive this certitute from the acts and proof produced in the trial.
If the court cannot arrive at this certitude, it is to pronounce that the right of the petitioner is not established, and is to dismiss the respondent as absolved.
Article 41 A judgment must:
(1) settle the controversy discussed before the court with an appropriate response given to each one of the questions;
(2) determine what obligations of the parties arises from the trial and how they must be fulfilled;
(3) set forth the reasons, that is, the motives both in law and in fact on which the sentence (the dispositive section of the judgment) is based.
Article 42 The judgment is to be published as soon as possible with an indication of the ways in which it can be challenged; it has no effect before publication even if the sentence has been made known to the parties.
Chapter IX Challenge of the Judgment
Article 43 A judgment is vitiated by nullity if:
(1) it was rendered by an incompetent court;
(2) it was rendered by a court presided by a person who is not a Judge or Magistrate of that court;
(3) the court passed the judgment under duress from force or grave fear;
(4) the trial was instituted without petition, or was not instituted against some respondent;
(5) it was rendered between parties one of whom at least did not have standing in court;
(6) one person acted in the court in the name of another without a legitimate mandate;
(7) the right of defense was denied to one or another party;
(8) it did not settle the controversy even partially;
(9) it is rendered in form which does not correspond to the prescriptions of Article 41 of this Act.
The complaint of nullity may always be proposed before the Imperial Parliament.
Not only the parties but also the Minister of Justice may propose a complaint of nullity.
Article 44 The party who feels aggrieved by a sentence of a given judgment have the right to appeal from the judgment to the Imperial Parliament.
There is no room for appeal:
(1) from a judgment of the Imperial Parliament;
(2) from a judgement which has become res iudicata.
An appeal must be filed before the National Assembly within the peremptory time limit of fifteen available days from the publication of the judgment.
If there are several respondents or petitioners, and if the judgment is challenges by only one or against only one of them, the challenge is considered made by all of them and against all of them whenever the matter sought is indivisible or it is a joint obligation; provided that unless there is evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that an appeal is made against all parts of a sentence.
An appeal suspends the execution of a sentence of the judgment that has been challenged.
At the appellate level, new basis for petitioning or new proofs may not be admitted.
Article 45 The procedure within the Imperial Parliament when examining a complaint of nullity or an appeal is governed by the norms of Chapters 6, 7 and 8 similarly.
Chapter X Res Iudicata
Article 46 A res iudicata results:
(1) if an appeal against a judgment is not filed within the time prescribed by Article 44, paragraph 3 of this Act;
(2) if the judgment challenged by an appeal is affirmed by the judgment of theIMperial Parliament.
Article 47 A res iudicata enjoys the stability of law and cannot be challenged and settles an issue between the parties and give rise to an action for execution and an exception of res iudicata which the court must declare ex officio to prevent a new introduction of the same case.
Article 48 Cases concerning the status of persons never become res iudicata.
Chapter XI Restitutio In Integrum
Article 49 Restitutio in integrum is granted against a judgment that has become a res iudicata provided that there is clear proof of its injustice.
Article 50 However, clear proof of injustice is verified only if:
(1) the judgment is so based on proofs which are later discovered to be false so that without those proofs the sentence would not be sustained;
(2) afterwards documents have been found which undoubtedly prove new facts which demand a contrary sentence;
(3) the sentence of the judgment was pronounced because of the crime of one party which harmed the other;
(4) a prescription of the law which is not merely procedural has been evidently neglected;
(5) the sentence is contrary to the sentence of a preceding judgment which has become a res iudicata.
Article 51 Restitutio in integrum for the reasons mentioned in Article 50 of this Act must be sought from the court which issued the definitive judgment in the case, within one month to be computed from the date of one's becoming aware of the reasons; provided that after the expiration of the delay prescribed, only the President of the Republic, acting on the advice of the Chief Justice and after consultation with the president of the Judicial Yuan and the Attorney-General, may grant a restitutio in integrum.
Article 52 If restitutio in integrum is granted, the competent court must pronounce on the merits of the case.
Chapter XII Execution of the Sentence
Article 53 A sentence of a judgment which has become a res iudicata must be executed.
Article 54 When the respondent is condemned to render a prestation to the petitioner, he must do so within twenty-one days after the judgment has become a res iudicata.
Article 55 There may be no forced execution of a sentence prior to an executory order of the Supreme Court; this order is to be made upon petition for execution presented by the petitioner to which the respondent is bound to perform a prestation.
The forced execution of a sentence is performed by an executor who is appointed by the executory order; he or she is a Commissioner of the Supreme Court; the Executive Yuan must provide him or her with such assistance as may be necessary for the duly execution of the sentence.
Chapter XIII Prescriptions
Article 56 An action is terminated by a prescription if it is not exercised, by a person entitled to act as petitioner by reason of possession of a right, within one year after it could have been first exercised.
Article 57 Actions concerning the status of persons are never terminated by a prescription.
Chapter XIV Final
Article 58 This act shall take effect from the date of promulgation.
Mr. Speaker,
If no one is presenting any objections to this bill, I propose we adopt it through unanimous consent because it's been sitting here with no attention from the rest of Parliament for too long.
I repeat what I said in the Criminal Code thread:
"Usually when Law Codes are written, which are very long, the respective Congress will approve it "sobre tablas" if they trust the writer. This means that as it is a very lengthy piece of legislation and the writer is trusted and respected by all the bill is passed "on a closed book". And later on as its application makes it neccesary some changes are introduced, or not."
"For example, when in the early year in Argentina a guy named Velez Sarfield wrote the civil and commercial codes about early XX century, and it was approved as a whole no changes whatsoever until they were neccesary. Having read Argentina's Civil Code in its entirety (or almost) I can see this usually works."
"Therefore I suggest we do this with Alexandrian codes as well: that we pass them "sobre tablas"."
Sincerely,
HH Grand Duke Jacques de Beaufort
Like I said in the other thread let the vote begin. OUI