Appeal Inadmissibility Due to Conformity with Appellants' Initial Request
France (FR)
Synthèse Legislator
Généré par l'IAA party appealing a decision that held one defendant liable for an accident that occurred while the injured party was hospitalized and simultaneously dismissed another co-defendant (the clinic) cannot have its appeal declared admissible if the original cross-appeal explicitly requested that the court rule on the liability of both the individual practitioner and the clinic, jointly and severally, and award provisional damages; the appellate court's ruling, which granted the requested relief against the practitioner while dismissing the clinic, was in conformity with the appellants' own conclusions, rendering their subsequent appeal inadmissible due to a lack of interest.
Regeste Legislator
Généré par l'IAIRRECEVABLE; Appeal Inadmissibility Due to Conformity with Appellants' Initial Request: A party appealing a decision that held one defendant liable for an accident that occurred while the injured party was hospitalized and simultaneously dismissed another co-defendant (the clinic) cannot have its appeal declared admissible if the original cross-appeal explicitly requested that the court rule on the liability of both the individual practitioner and the clinic, jointly and severally, and award provisional damages; the appellate court's ruling, which granted the requested relief against the practitioner while dismissing the clinic, was in conformity with the appellants' own conclusions, rendering their subsequent appeal inadmissible due to a lack of interest.
Mots-clés
Généré par l'IADispositions légales citées
Généré par l'IADécisions connexes
Généré par l'IAQuestions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator
Généré par l'IAThe appeal was declared inadmissible because the parties who appealed did not have an interest in doing so, as the appealed decision conformed to their own conclusions.
Texte complet
SUR LA RECEVABILITE DU POURVOI : ATTENDU QUE LES EPOUX X... SE SONT POURVUS EN CASSATION CONTRE UN ARRET, QUI A DECLARE LE DOCTEUR NAUDASCHER Z... D'UN ACCIDENT SURVENU A LA DAME X..., ALORS QUE CELLE-CI SE TROUVAIT HOSPITALISEE A LA CLINIQUE MEDICALE DU CENTRE, DONT CE PRATICIEN ASSUMAIT LA DIRECTION ET QUI A MIS LADITE CLINIQUE HORS DE CAUSE ;
QUE LE POURVOI CRITIQUE CETTE MISE HORS DE CAUSE ;
MAIS ATTENDU QUE DES QUALITES DE L'ARRET ATTAQUE IL RESULTE QUE LES EPOUX X... AVAIENT, DANS LEURS CONCLUSIONS D'APPEL INCIDENT DEMANDE A LA COUR D'APPEL, OUTRE L'INFIRMATION DU JUGEMENT ENTREPRIS, DE DECLARER LE DOCTEUR Y... ET LA CLINIQUE MEDICALE DU CENTRE, RESPONSABLES, IN SOLIDUM, OU L'UN A DEFAUT DE L'AUTRE, DE L'ACCIDENT SURVENU A LA DAME X..., ET DE LES CONDAMNER, SOUS LA MEME ALTERNATIVE, AU PAYEMENT D'UNE INDEMNITE PROVISIONNELLE DE 150.000 FRANCS ET AUX DEPENS ;
ATTENDU, DES LORS, QUE L'ARRET, QUI DECLARE LE DOCTEUR NAUDASCHER Z... DE L'ACCIDENT, DONT LA DAME X... A ETE VICTIME, ET QUI LE CONDAMNE A PAYER A CELLE-CI L'INDEMNITE PROVISIONNELLE PAR ELLE RECLAMEE, AINSI QU'AUX DEPENS DE PREMIERE INSTANCE ET D'APPEL, A ETE RENDU CONFORMEMENT AUX PROPRES CONCLUSIONS DES DEMANDEURS EN CASSATION, LESQUELS SONT, PAR SUITE ET FAUTE D'INTERET, IRRECEVABLES EN LEUR POURVOI ;
PAR CES MOTIFS : DECLARE IRRECEVABLE LE POURVOI FORME CONTRE L'ARRET RENDU LE 17 FEVRIER 1956 PAR LA COUR D'APPEL D'ORLEANS. NO 58-12.121. EPOUX X... C/ CLINIQUE MEDICALE DU CENTRE ET AUTRE. PRESIDENT : M. BORNET. - RAPPORTEUR : M. BLIN. - PREMIER AVOCAT GENERAL : M. GAVALDA. - AVOCAT : M. CAIL. A RAPPROCHER : 1ER JUILLET 1959, BULL. 1959, II, NO 526 (1E), P. 345 ET LES ARRETS CITES.