SOME ISSUES RELATED TO THE PROCEDURE OF THE ACTION BY STAGES IN THE CASE LAW OF CROATIAN COURTS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25234/pv/20922Keywords:
action by stages, manifestation request, undetermined lawsuit, procedural powers, preliminary procedureAbstract
The action by stages was introduced into the Croatian civil procedure law by the 2003 Law on Amendments to the Civil Procedure Act, with the aim of increasing the general quality and efficiency in providing legal protection and improving the general functioning of civil procedure. Courts do not keep records of the number of received actions by stages lawsuits, but available case law indicates that difficulties do exist and thus the need for a serious approach to this issue. The aim of this paper is to point out the importance of understanding the legal institute of action by stages with an emphasis on its practical application. Participants in court proceedings who apply to the court by filing an action by stages must be aware of its legal effects at certain stages of civil proceedings. On the other hand, the court must also ensure the lawful application of this institute so as not to commit procedural violations that would jeopardize the litigants’ legal position. In this regard, the analysis of this legal institute is necessary in order to remove practical doubts and ensure its legal function. Research results of this paper have confirmed that practical doubts should not be neglected and that there is room to consider a more efficient solution than the one in existence.
References
Aras Kramar S, Objektivna preinaka tužbe u praksi (2021) 30 (6) Pravo i porezi 10
Aras Kramar S i Jović B, Nove činjenice i dokazi u parničnom postupku (2015) 48 (97) Pravnik 57
Braun J, Lehrbuch des Zivilprozeßrechts, Erkenntnisverfaren (Mohr Siebeck, 2014)
Dika M, Građansko parnično procesno pravo, Tužba (Narodne novine, 2009)
Dika M, Samostalna manifestacijska tužba i stupnjevita tužba, (2005), 44 (1) Pravo u gospodarstvu
Grbin I, Nove vrste tužbi i odluka u parničnom postupku, (2005) 44(6) Pravo u gospodarstvu 275
Hennighausen J, Das Gebot der Unabhangigkeit bei Erlass eines Teilurteils (Mohr Siebeck, 2021)
Katić D, Pravne posljedice zaključenja prethodnog postupka (prema Zakonu o izmjenama i dopunama Zakona o parničnom postupku iz travnja (2013) 11–12 Odvjetnik 24
Mukić Vidaković M, Opći pravni rječnik (Narodne novine, 2006)
Olivet C, Juristische Arbeitstechnik in der Zivilstation (4. Auflage, C. F. Müller, 2010)
Pantle N i Kreissl S, Die Praxis des Zivilprozesses (4. Auflage, Verlog W. Kohlhammer, 2007)
Pavlović M, Manifestacijska stupnjevita tužba i tužba vjerovnika prije dospjelosti njegove tražbine (2019) 56 (4) Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Splitu 923
Pavlović M, Zahtjevi po stupnjevitoj tužbi i teškoće u ovrsi (2019) 67 (6590) Informator 13
Pavlović M, Maratonski „uvodni“ postupak po stupnjevitoj tužbi uz poteškoće u ovrsi, (2021) 60 (1) Pravo u gospodarstvu 169
Pechstein M, EU/EG Prozessrecht (3. neu bearbeitete Auflage, Mohr Siebeck, 2007)
Schellhamer K, Zivilprozess, Gesetz-Praxis-Falle (15. Auflage, C.F. Muller, 2016)
Schwab M, Zivilprozessrecht (5. Auflage, C.F. Müller, 2016)
Rosenberg L, Zivilprozessrecht (17. Auflage, Verlag C.H. Beck, 2010)
Šagovac A, Prekluzije sa zaključenjem prethodnog postupka: prijedlozi i mišljenja (2015) 63 (6388) Informator 12
Uzelac A, Delays and Backlogs in Civil Procedure, A (South) East European Perspective (2014) 39 (238) Revista de Processo (RePro, Sao Paolo)
Wieczorek B i Schütze R, Zivilprozessordnung und Nebengesetze, Großkommentar (De Gruyter Recht, 2007)
Wieczorek B i Schütze R, Zivilprozessordnung und Nebengesetze, Großkommentar (Auflage 4., De Gruyter, 2013)
PROPISI
Zakon o parničnom postupku (NN 53/1991, 91/1992, 58/1993, 112/1999, 88/2005, 2/2007, 84/2008, 96/2008,123/2008, 57/2011, 148/2011, 25/2013, 89/2014, 70/2019) (HR)
Zakon o izmjenama i dopunama Zakona o parničnom postupku (NN 117/2003) (HR)
Zivilprozessordnung, https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/zpo/, pristupljeno 1. veljače 2022. (DE)
Zivilprozessordnung, https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/GeltendeFassung.wxe? Abfrage=Bundesnormen&Gesetzesnummer=10001699, pristupljeno 1. veljače 2022. (AT)
Zakon o pravdnem postopku, http://pisrs.si/Pis.web/pregledPredpisa?id= ZAKO1212 pristupljeno 1. srpnja 2022. (SLO)
Konačni prijedlog Zakona o izmjenama i dopunama Zakona o parničnom postupku, Zagreb, svibanj 2003. g., https://vlada.gov.hr/UserDocsImages// 2016/Sjednice/Arhiva //47.%20-%2011.pdf, pristupljeno 1. srpnja 2022.
SUDSKA PRAKSA
Presuda i rješenje Gž-R-469/2017 Županijski sud u Rijeci (14. prosinca 2017.) (HR)
Rješenje Revd-191/2020 VSRH (11. veljače 2020.) (HR)
Rješenje Gž-1334/2020 Županijski sud u Varaždinu (30. studenoga 2020.) (HR)
Rješenje Gž-336/2020 Županijski sud u Zagrebu (18. veljače 2020.) (HR)
Rješenje Gž-52/2020 Županijski sud u Vukovaru (10. veljače 2020.) (HR)
Općinski sud u Osijeku pod poslovnim brojem: Pr-310/2019 (HR)
Općinski sud u Vinkovcima, Stalna služba u Županji broj: P-873/2019 (HR)
Općinski sud u Osijeku, Stalna služba u Belom Manastiru broj: P-1008/2019, P-2428/2019, P-642/2019, P-1093/2019, P-470/2019 (HR)
Općinski sud u Osijeku broj: P-641/2019, P-1305/2019, P-938/2019, P-590/2019 (HR)
Općinski sud u Đakovu broj: P-367/2019, P-360/2019 (HR)
Općinski sud u Đakovu, Stalna služba u Našicama broj: P-369/2019 (HR)
Općinski građanski sud u Zagrebu broj: P-745/2019 (HR)
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Vedrana Švedl Blažeka
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors retain the copyright on the papers published in the Journal, but grant the right of first publication to the Journal. Papers accepted for publication or already published in Pravni vjesnik of the Faculty of Law in Osijek may be published by the author(s) in other publications only with proper notice of its previous publication in Pravni vjesnik.
