JB/042/279/001: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts

JB/042/279/001: Difference between revisions

BenthamBot (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Phil.fawcet (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 3: Line 3:
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->


''This Page Has Not Been Transcribed Yet''
1824. April 2 +
Constitutional Code Copd
 
ulto
Ch. XI. Judiciary collectively
&sect;. Intercommunity of
service
 
5
 
Art. 10. Of As between <gap/><gap/><gap/><gap/><gap/><gap/> <gap/><gap/><gap/>
the execution of which place, of the <gap/> the execution of the other would
if at the same point of time would be is impossible this
Art. 10. As between two such conflicting orders, the prevalence
<gap/> preference belongs <gap/><gap/><gap/><gap/>
belongs in the first instance to that one to
which execution was is first begun to be given.
 
Art. 12 11 As But, in case of disagreement, between the invading the prevalence
belongs provisionally to the orders of the invaded Judge.
and the invaded Judge Judge, to the orders of
the invaded Judge belongs provisionally the preference <gap/>
 
Art. 12. Jurisdiction-adjustive function. To this function
exercise is given, by an <gap/> imperative order declaring, <gap/> on Appeal from <gap/>
of the two conflicting orders, to which of them execution shall be given. On <gap/><gap/><gap/>
 
Art. <gap/><gap/><gap/><gap/>
To this function in that case <gap/>
<gap/> made by a party against the order of the invaded
<gap/> either of the three <gap/> conflicting orders, to which of them execution shall be
Jud<gap/><gap/><gap/><gap/><gap/> invading Judge
<gap/><gap/> <gap/> <gap/><gap/><gap/>
<gap/><gap/><gap/>, cognizance will be to <gap/>
<gap/><gap/><gap/><gap/>
given belongs to the Judge Appellate. If both, if <gap/><gap/><gap/>
definitively given. If the This function, if the
territories are situated both <gap/> within the same District <gap/> <gap/> <gap/>
belongs <gap/><gap/> to the Judge Appellate; if in different districts, to the
Justice Minister.
 
Art. 13. To him to whom In the exercise of this function jurisdiction-
adjustive function <gap/><gap/> it will be the <gap/> of the Judge will have take care, lest <gap/>
on the one part through <gap/> <gap/> invasion be unduly declined or or unduly
practised performed, or on other part unduly acquiesced in or
opposed: as also lest, by collusion of on one or both
parts priority as between of execution, <gap/> in favour of <gap/> <gap/>
<gap/><gap/><gap/><gap/> a party on the either side, be unduly obtained.
 
Art. 14. Provisional where only is the preference prevalence here spoken of. As Between counterdemandants, <gap/> in the same
judicial <gap/> <gap/> or in different judicial <gap/>,
for the arrangements made for ultimate equality or proportionality
of distribution, as of <gap/> <gap/><gap/> burthens so of benefits see the Penal
and the <gap/> Non-penal, more especially the Non-penal Code.






<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Untranscribed}}
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{In_Progress}}

Revision as of 09:36, 2 September 2022

Click Here To Edit

1824. April 2 + Constitutional Code Copd

ulto Ch. XI. Judiciary collectively §. Intercommunity of service

5

Art. 10. Of As between the execution of which place, of the the execution of the other would if at the same point of time would be is impossible this Art. 10. As between two such conflicting orders, the prevalence preference belongs belongs in the first instance to that one to which execution was is first begun to be given.

Art. 12 11 As But, in case of disagreement, between the invading the prevalence belongs provisionally to the orders of the invaded Judge. and the invaded Judge Judge, to the orders of the invaded Judge belongs provisionally the preference

Art. 12. Jurisdiction-adjustive function. To this function exercise is given, by an imperative order declaring, on Appeal from of the two conflicting orders, to which of them execution shall be given. On

Art. To this function in that case made by a party against the order of the invaded either of the three conflicting orders, to which of them execution shall be Jud invading Judge , cognizance will be to given belongs to the Judge Appellate. If both, if definitively given. If the This function, if the territories are situated both within the same District belongs to the Judge Appellate; if in different districts, to the Justice Minister.

Art. 13. To him to whom In the exercise of this function jurisdiction- adjustive function it will be the of the Judge will have take care, lest on the one part through invasion be unduly declined or or unduly practised performed, or on other part unduly acquiesced in or opposed: as also lest, by collusion of on one or both parts priority as between of execution, in favour of a party on the either side, be unduly obtained.

Art. 14. Provisional where only is the preference prevalence here spoken of. As Between counterdemandants, in the same judicial or in different judicial , for the arrangements made for ultimate equality or proportionality of distribution, as of burthens so of benefits see the Penal and the Non-penal, more especially the Non-penal Code.




Identifier: | JB/042/279/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 42.

Date_1

1824-04-02

Marginal Summary Numbering

10-13

Box

042

Main Headings

constitutional code

Folio number

279

Info in main headings field

constitutional code

Image

001

Titles

Category

text sheet

Number of Pages

1

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

e5

Penner

jeremy bentham

Watermarks

Marginals

jeremy bentham

Paper Producer

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

"copd"

ID Number

13202

Box Contents

UCL Home » Transcribe Bentham » Transcription Desk
  • Create account
  • Log in