Suchergebnisse

A departure from traditional procedural concepts was launched by the adoption of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. One of the major innovations instituted which diminishes the time required for litigation is the pre-trial con ference. This conference between the adversary lawyers and the judge delimits the issues in an action, disposing of un contested issues, fixing the essential points, and thus often pre paring a case for settlement. Though a practical and effective procedure, the full rewards have yet to be reaped. The rela tive newness of the pre-trial conference and the unequal impact of the expanded litigation have limited its country-wide adop tion. Pre-trial procedure recognizes the current conception of a lawsuit: one free from surprise, with all triable issues exposed prior to the courtroom.—Ed.

Im US-Zivilprozess schließt sich an die Klageerhebung ein Sachverhalts- und Beweisermittlungsverfahren an, das als 'Pre-Trial Discovery' bezeichnet wird. Die Prozessparteien können dabei umfangreiche Herausgabeansprüche auf Beweismittel geltend machen. Derartige Verfahren kennt das kontinentaleuropäische Recht nicht. Es kann insbesondere dann mit dem Datenschutzrecht in Konflikt geraten, wenn Deutsche Unternehmen vor US-Gerichten verklagt werden. In manchen Fällen reicht bereits die Zugehörigkeit zu einem multinationalen Konzern aus, um von der Pre-Trial Discovery berührt zu werden, sollte ein anderes Unternehmen des Konzerns in den USA verklagt worden sein. Alexander Harguth stellt die kritischen Aspekte des US-Zivilprozessrechts umfassend dar und geht auf die Berührungspunkte mit der deutschen Rechtsordnung ein. Er setzt sich dabei vor allem mit datenschutzrechtlichen Konflikten auseinander und zeigt mögliche Lösungswege für internationale Unternehmen auf.

A response to Kevin Kirwin and Chris Hignett (Probation Journal, June 1987), alleging that their arguments against preparing pre- trial SERS are unsound, negative and promote passive practice.

PROCEDURAL MANUAL PRE-TRIAL INVESTIGATIONA. M. DOLGOPOLOV, Candidate of Juridical Sciences, docent of Department of Administrative and Financial LawNational University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine During the preliminary investigation, the following power subjects of criminal proceedings as an inquirer, investigator, head of the pretrial investigation, prosecutor, investigating judge. The procedure for their appointment, the nature of the activities and powers defined in the Code of Ukraine. The comparative analysis of these powers shows that henceforth investigator and the investigator are responsible only for the legality and timeliness of execution proceedings. However, they are deprived of any means to directly defend his own inner conviction in court, did not participate in the proceedings, did not have the right to appeal against unlawful court decisions. Moreover investigator and the investigator are based on a head of a pretrial investigation, prosecutor and investigating judge engaged in various forms of procedural control over their activities.Due to a procedural situation investigator and the investigator, the legislator has transferred primary responsibility for the investigation into a criminal offense to prosecutor and ordered him to provide prompt, full and impartial investigation into the offense. For successful implementation of the said duty legislator Ukraine gave the prosecutor, who shall exercise the powers of the prosecutor in the criminal proceedings, the right to procedural guide pre-trial investigation. Thus, the theoretical and practical levels in Ukraine, a new generic term procedural manual pre-trial investigation.First of all it is necessary to emphasize that the prosecutor's procedural guidance during the pre-trial investigation – is, first, self-direction prosecutorial activities aimed at providing swift, full and impartial investigation – investigation of all circumstances committed a criminal offense to provide the evidence of good legal assessment, indicating the functional nature of the said prosecution. Second, if the performance of the prosecution Ukraine constitutional functions of supervision over observance of laws by the pre-trial investigation is intended to ensure the legitimacy of the modern pre-trial investigation (actions and decisions of all participants in this phase of the criminal process, of course, in addition to investigating judges), the performance features prosecutor procedural guidance (usually no supervision) aimed only at ensuring rapid, full and impartial investigation of criminal offenses individual subjects of the process – inquirers and investigators who are already within the software prosecutor regime legitimacy. And it can not be considered a form of implementation of the supervisory powers of the prosecutor.Also exclusively on the basis of agreed prosecutor investigating judge investigating petitions:- considering imposing monetary penalties on a person;- temporarily limiting the use of special rights: a) the right to control the vehicle or vessel; b) the right to hunt; c) the right of establishment;- suspension from work;- authorizes temporary access to things and documents;- imposes seizure of property and the temporarily seized property;- applying preventive measures in the form of: a) personal commitment; b) personal surety; c) collateral; d) house arrest; e) detention;- authorizes the detention for the purpose of the drive;- continued detention and house arrest;- changes precautions.How prosecutor must act if the investigator has made in the Unified Register application for a criminal offense has started preliminary investigation and notified the prosecutor, and that the content of the application sees only an administrative offense or the circumstances which prevent criminal proceedings. The prosecutor has no authority to remove such information from the registry, not because it does not involve Ukraine, and a purely technical reasons, in the Unified Register of pre-trial investigation is automatically fixed date submit information and given a number of criminal proceedings. That prosecutor striking out information about criminal procedure violates these registration statements and reports. In our opinion, in such cases, the prosecutor must decide the closure of criminal proceedings under the relevant paragraph. At the beginning of criminal proceedings in cases of grave and especially grave crimes that are large in scope and very complex, it may be the establishment of the investigation team.