Representative's Limited Personal Appeal Restricts Scope of Incidental Appeal by Insurer
France (FR)
Synthèse Legislator
Généré par l'IAFollowing a traffic accident, a judgment jointly ordered a group of individuals and an insurance company to pay damages to one party, who was acting both personally and as the legal representative for his minor children, and validated a garnishment order against the representative only. When the representative appealed only in his personal capacity, the insurer filed an incidental appeal against him in both his personal and representative capacities, as well as against his now-adult children, leading to the appellate court declaring the incidental appeal inadmissible as to the representative's other capacities. The high court upheld this decision, reasoning that since the initial appeal only challenged the judgment concerning the representative in his personal capacity, the appellate jurisdiction was limited to those aspects, precluding the incidental appeal from challenging other unappealed parts of the judgment concerning his capacities as a representative or the now-adult children.
Regeste Legislator
Généré par l'IAarticle 548 du nouveau Code de procédure civile; Representative's Limited Personal Appeal Restricts Scope of Incidental Appeal by Insurer: When the representative appealed only in his personal capacity, the insurer filed an incidental appeal against him in both his personal and representative capacities, as well as against his now-adult children, leading to the appellate court declaring the incidental appeal inadmissible as to the representative's other capacities. The high court upheld this decision, reasoning that since the initial appeal only challenged the judgment concerning the representative in his personal capacity, the appellate jurisdiction was limited to those aspects, precluding the incidental appeal from challenging other unappealed parts of the judgment concerning his capacities as a representative or the now-adult children.
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'IAAlthough cited by the appellant as the basis for their argument that the incidental appeal should have been admissible, the Court rejected the appeal, meaning this article was the core legal provision debated regarding the admissibility of the incidental appeal, even though the court ultimately found no violation.
Texte complet
Sur le moyen unique :
Attendu, selon l'arrêt attaqué (Bordeaux, 15 novembre 1990), qu'à la suite d'un accident de la circulation un jugement a condamné in solidum les consorts Barrière et la compagnie d'assurances L'Alsacienne (l'Alsacienne) à payer certaines sommes à titre de dommages-intérêts à M. X..., agissant tant à titre personnel qu'en qualité d'administrateur légal des biens de ses enfants mineurs, et validé la saisie-arrêt à l'encontre du seul M. X... ; que M. X... ayant interjeté appel en son nom personnel, l'Alsacienne a formé un appel incident par voie d'assignation ;
Attendu qu'il est fait grief à l'arrêt d'avoir déclaré irrecevable l'appel incident dirigé contre M. X..., ès qualités, et à l'encontre de ses deux enfants devenus majeurs, alors que, lorsqu'un jugement contient plusieurs chefs distincts et qu'une partie interjette appel de l'un d'eux, l'intimé peut appeler incidemment des autres chefs, de telle sorte que la cour d'appel aurait violé l'article 548 du nouveau Code de procédure civile ;
Mais attendu que M. X..., qui avait une double qualité devant le Tribunal, n'a interjeté appel qu'à titre personnel de telle sorte que l'instance n'a été dévolue à la cour d'appel que des chefs du jugement le concernant ; que l'arrêt énonce, en conséquence, à bon droit, que l'Alsacienne ne pouvait former un appel incident des autres chefs ;
D'où il suit que le moyen n'est pas fondé ;
PAR CES MOTIFS :
REJETTE le pourvoi.