xml:lang="en" lang="en" dir="ltr">

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Keep up to date with the latest news - subscribe to the Transcribe Bentham newsletter; Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts

JB/034/255/001

Jump to: navigation, search
Completed

Click Here To Edit

1823. Octr. 29
Constitutional Code – Procedure.

§. Evidence discovered after ultimate decrees – how far producible

Art. In relation to any matter of fact what may
sometimes happen is – that after a suit instituted and terminated,
evidence transpires by which had it been received in
time, decrees opposite to those by which the suit has been was
terminated has been is brought to light. In such cases the
proper judicatory to apply to Judicatory in which the suit had been so terminated.
But in such a case exceptions excepted, the Judge will
not at grant and appoint a fresh recapitulatory quasi trial examination
unless upon examination of the party applying he is satisfied
that of the existence of the fresh evidence in question no knowledge was
the party had not antecedently to the utterance of the
termination definitive decrees in question any knowledge.

Art. Exceptions are as follows

1. Where though at the time in question he did not either tender
make extraction or cause the require the extraction of the evidence
in question, he gave indication of the existence of it:
the non-production of it having for its cause the
conception of the adequacy of the mass of evidence actually
adduced coupled with the desire of avoiding
the all delay, vexation and expence inseparable
from the production of it coupled with the persuasion of the
non-necessity of it as above.

Art 2. Where antecedently to the termination of
the suit as above, the existence of a certain article of
evidence was material to the corroboration of the
article of newly discovered evidence was known, but the newly discovered
evidence itself not being known, the
and importance materiality of it not being could not be known, the reason
for giving indication of it had not at that time place.


Identifier: | JB/034/255/001
"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 34.

Date_1

1823-10-29

Marginal Summary Numbering

Box

034

Main Headings

constitutional code; procedure code

Folio number

255

Info in main headings field

constitutional code - procedure

Image

001

Titles

Category

text sheet

Number of Pages

1

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

c1 / e1

Penner

jeremy bentham

Watermarks

j whatman turkey mill 1822

Marginals

Paper Producer

admiral pavel chichagov

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

1822

Notes public

ID Number

10529

Box Contents

UCL Home » Transcribe Bentham » Transcription Desk