Expedite Justice

This is a controversial project that has not left indifferent to all that from various agencies working on, by and for justice.

Among the most prominent include:

Civil jurisdiction

The procedure will be suppressed to a limit of 250,000 euros equating European payment system.

In terms of resources:

Appeal: is deleted in oral proceedings reclamation claims amount to 6,000 euros, so the court decision shall be final and not appealable.

It also eliminates the process of notice and preparation of resources so that they are announced and formalized in a written one.

Appeal: Updating the minimum amount in bringing an appeal for judicial orders and civil, unchanged from 1998 and 2000, respectively, which goes from 150,000 to 800,000 euros.

Special processes for the protection of credit, joins the "renting" (long-term lease-purchase) Special procedural regime, which was intended for the protection of similar contracts as the "leasing" in terms of recovery of the delivered goods leased.

Administrative Litigation

Elimination of steps in the evidentiary phase, suppression of the view that the parties agree, is more clearly regulates the legal status of urgent precautionary measures.

Quantitative limits are raised, both the appeal and the appeal, the latter from 150,000 to 800,000 euros.

In terms of legal costs for the processes of single and first joined the criterion of maturity, with the possibility that the court may exonerate them when circumstances justifying the non-taxation.

Criminal proceedings

The reform includes certain provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act, which regulate the operation of legal persons in the process as a defendant, following the entry into force of the Criminal Code reform of Organic Law 5 / 2010, which introduced a criminal liability of legal persons.

FOR

Regarding the payment procedure: This way, extending the use of a more flexible procedural instrument that has proven effective in debt claims at a time of crisis like the present.

Regarding Resources: It safeguards the right of access to court while limiting the unnecessary use of judicial and litigation prevents remain open for years.

Reduce time and avoid delays due to excessive paperwork.

Regarding the contentious-administrative: It incorporates certain amendments which involve a technical improvement and rationalization, as the removal of unnecessary bureaucracy in the evidentiary phase, the possible abolition of the hearing where the parties agree, or a more appropriate and clarified legal precautionary measures more urgent.

The acceleration is achieved in two ways: first, giving firmness to the resolutions in shorter periods and, second, discharging to the organs of appeal and cassation of a large volume of cases, allowing them to develop more quickly the rest of their functions.

AGAINST

It is left to the trial judges the final resolution of the dispute, making firm judgments of first instance, forbidding the citizen the right to appeal, it is true that speeding up the proceedings but to the detriment of the guarantees of citizens.

It can cause you to believe Kafkaesque situations such as two courts of first instance contradictory judgments on an issue value of less than 6,000 euros and can not be appealed.

The reform cuts the rights of citizens against the administration. There are a procedural streamlining. It is true that justice needs reform but not this way. There is no guarantee that will solve the collapse, why are not given greater number of judges to the courts and implemented the computerization of ushering them in that computerising all legal practitioners, officials and lawyers?.

What do you think?

M.D. Ortiz

Lawyer

www.masqueabogados.com