Abstract

This research dealt with the claim preclusion “ res judicata” of criminal judgement before the civil judge. As a comparative study between the Jordanian legislation and the Syrian legislation. It is known that penal legislation has decided the rule of res judicata against the civil case before the civil court. In the case of a civil case, a criminal judgment may be issued in the criminal proceedings, and the criminal judgment has res judicata that the civil court is obliged to respect it and not to judge contrary to final decision, whether the issued judgment was acquitted or the conviction as long as the civil action was not finalized . This study aims at discussing this subject in comparison between the Jordanian penal legislation and the Syrian penal legislation and to try to stand on the similarities and differences between them on this significant issue. The researcher used the descriptive approach by extrapolating the texts governing the title of the study in the legislation which are the Syrian legislation and the Jordanian legislation. The researcher used the analytical method by using the logical analysis of the texts of the legislations in order to extract the rule of matters in which has no specific text, issues that are subject to ambiguity and disagreement through multiple jurisprudential readings and legislative texts. The study was divided into sections ;an introduction and two topics. The first topic: What is res judicata “claim preclusion”? The second topic: The implications of the res judicata of the criminal judgment before the civil judiciary. The study reached many conclusions and recommendations, including: Authenticity is a kind of refrain enjoyed by the ruling, which is considered by virtue of including a presumption that does not accept the contrary decision in terms of its form and subject, it is the title of the truth, and the most important direct effects of res judicata before the civil judiciary is the following: It is not permissible to look into the issue of criminal judgment again before the civil court and it is not permissible to re-examine the subject of a complaint to give a check that does not receive a balance before the civil court after the criminal court decided by a final penalty. Key words: Res judicata , criminal judgement, authenticity of criminal judgment DOI: 10.7176/JLPG/88-27 Publication date: August 31st 2019

Highlights

  • Judicial judgment is the means by which the claimant acquires his civil rights and it is a way to issue the appropriate punishment against the offender in criminal proceedings

  • The study reached many conclusions and recommendations, including: Authenticity is a kind of refrain enjoyed by the ruling, which is considered by virtue of including a presumption that does not accept the contrary decision in terms of its form and subject, it is the title of the truth, and the most important direct effects of res judicata before the civil judiciary is the following: It is not permissible to look into the issue of criminal judgment again before the civil court and it is not permissible to re-examine the subject of a complaint to give a check that does not receive a balance before the civil court after the criminal court decided by a final penalty

  • Res judicata or as it is known claim preclusion is a kind of preclude enjoyed by the judgment, which is considered by virtue of including an evidence that does not accept another evidence to contrary in terms of form and subject, as it is the title of the truth

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Judicial judgment is the means by which the claimant acquires his civil rights and it is a way to issue the appropriate punishment against the offender in criminal proceedings. Provisions have been subject to respect and sanctity that prevents the judge from reviewing the rights or decisions contained therein. Res judicata stands for the final judgement without the need to mention its facts or causes, it can be the authoritative reason, when it is closely linked to the final decision so that the judgement cannot be understood if it is separated from the reasons. The court which has rendered the judgment shall not review or amend the provision and other courts shall refrain from considering the foregoing ,unless these courts by law are the courts where the appeal shall be conducted before it

Objectives
Methods
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call