progetti

Service of procedural notices and third-party appeal rights

ARGVP-1988-3065Tribunale superiore4 lug 1972Partially Granted

Apri la fonte

Estratto da Omnilex

Sintesi Omnilex

The excerpt contains two related civil procedural holdings. First, a ward in a clinic could not be sanctioned for non-payment of a cost advance where the procedural notice was not also served on the guardian; the court found a formal denial of justice, annulled the order, and remitted the case because the advance had since been paid. Second, where the parties consent, a court may decide the main claim and a recourse claim against a third party in one judgment, and the third party ordered to pay is entitled to appeal.

Massima Omnilex

Art. 392 ZGB; service of procedural notices to persons under guardianship and in institutional care; a ward who is not left with adequate legal protection cannot be solely blamed for non-compliance with a cost-advance order if the notice was not also served on the guardian, so that refusal to proceed constitutes a formal denial of justice and the matter must be remitted. Art. 55 ZPO; with the parties' consent, the court may adjudicate main claim and recourse claim against a third party in one judgment; the third party burdened with a payment order is directly affected and therefore entitled to appeal.

Testo completo

C. Gerichtsentscheide 3065, 3066 3065 Zustellung prozessualer Aufforderungen. Fristansetzung zur Kosten­bevorschussung gegenüber Anstaltsinsassen. Aus Art. 392 ZGB geht ganz allgemein hervor, dass das Gesetz geistig erkrankte oder in ihren äusseren Verhältnissen eingeschränkte Personen in dringenden Angelegenheiten nicht schutzlos lassen will; vgl. als be­sonders deutliches Beispiel für die Notwendigkeit einer ausreichenden gesetzlichen Vertretung bei allen prozessualen Vorkehren BGE 77 II 7 ff., insbesondere S. 13 E. 3. Ist für einen Entmündigten, der in eine Klinik ein­gewiesen wurde, bereits vorsorglich ein Vormund bestimmt worden, so sind die prozessualen Aufforderungen nicht nur dem Mündel, sondern mindestens auch dem Vormund zuzustellen. Das war hier nicht der Fall. Da der Beschwerdeführer die Nichtleistung des Kostenvorschusses nicht ausschliesslich selbst zu verantworten hat, liegt eine formelle Rechts­verweigerung vor. Die Beschwerde ist daher zu schützen und der ange- fochtene Beschluss aufzuheben. Die Streitsache ist, da das Geld inzwi­schen eingegangen ist, zur materiellen Behandlung an die Vorinstanz zurückzuweisen. JuAK4.7.1972 (RBer 1972/73, S .40) 3066 Streitverkündung. Entscheid über Regress auf Dritten. Appellations­befugnis (Art. 55 ZPO1). Bei Einwilligung der Beteiligten kann das Gericht im gleichen Urteil über die Hauptklage und über das Rückgriffsrecht einer Partei gegenüber einem Dritten entscheiden; Art. 55 ZPO1. Dem Dritten, der zu einer Zah­lung verpflichtet wird, steht das Appellationsrecht zu. OGer 29. 5.1972 (RBer 1972/73, S. 34) 1 Zivilprozessordnung vom 24. April 1955, vgl. Art. 58 ZPO vom 27. April 1980(bGS 231.1) 424

Parole chiave

guardianshipservice of processcost advanceformal denial of justicethird-party noticeappellate standing

Estratto da Omnilex

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Omnilex

Questione giuridica chiave

Whether procedural notices demanding a cost advance had to be served on both an institutionalized ward and his guardian.

Decisione estratta

Where a ward placed in a clinic already has a guardian appointed, procedural notices must be served not only on the ward but at least also on the guardian; otherwise the failure to pay the cost advance cannot be attributed solely to the ward.

Motivazione estratta

Article 392 CC shows that mentally ill or externally constrained persons should not be left unprotected in urgent matters; adequate legal representation is required for procedural steps. Because service was not made to the guardian, the refusal to pay the advance was not exclusively the appellant's fault and amounted to a formal denial of justice.

Questione giuridica chiave

Whether, with the parties' consent, the court may decide in one judgment on the main claim and a recourse claim against a third party, and whether the third party may appeal.

Decisione estratta

With the consent of the parties, the court may decide the main claim and a party's recourse claim against a third party in the same judgment; the third party ordered to pay has standing to appeal.

Motivazione estratta

Article 55 CCP permits such combined adjudication, and the third party is directly affected by the payment order, so appellate standing must be recognized.

Continua la tua ricerca in ChatGPT o Claude

Collega Omnilex per cercare nel corpus legale dal tuo assistente IA.