happens in daily bustle of the lawyers who litigate, we find some judges and some court staff who are more Catholic than the Pope. And apply the law as they see fit. Sometimes carried by visceral motivations (with the liver) that high standard that must be the delicate task of admistrar justice. analysis. In the Fourth Magistrate's Court Counsel of Villa Maria del Triunfo, by disqualification of a secretary, and manifest partiality and the grounds contained in Article 307 of the Civil Procedure Code, applicable in criminal cases additionally mandated by the first supplementary Adejetivo Code cited above, we have arbitrarily imposed the penalty of a fine , supposedly for having offended the cursor. Having suspended without being notified of any pre-emptive warning, saying that we have violated Article 109 of the prior mencionadp legal body. But more unusual is that the judge in one of its reasons for its irritating resolution, said that the grounds for recusal are contained in Article 29 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. But are these grounds are application to the judges, having the power to decide them, and not for the court officers. But without being notified the previous warning, which is an excess, an unconscionable abuse of authority that undermines the MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, even more than as appears from the letter of objection, has not produced any offense or has disrespected the secretary mención.Se sanctions we have invoked only the cause contained in the inc. 1 paragraph 307 of the Code of Civil Procedure: close friend or enemy is manifest either party, as evidenced by unequivocal facts. Again this is an abuse. An attempt on the Rights of Attorney contained in the inc. 8 of Article 289 of the Consolidated Text and Order of the Judicial Power Organization Act. In this regard we have appealed this decision siungular. You are now in the Mixed Court. A let's see how it resolves the excess court.
0 comments:
Post a Comment