Appeal Inadmissibility Due to Procedural Non-Compliance in Disciplinary Matter
France (FR)
Synthèse Legislator
Généré par l'IAAn individual filed an appeal with the Court of Cassation on August 18, 2010, against a disciplinary decision rendered by the High Council of the Judiciary on June 23, 1992. The court declared the appeal inadmissible because, absent a specific exception, an appeal to the Court of Cassation must be submitted via a declaration signed by an attorney practicing before the Council of State and the Court of Cassation, and the filing in this disciplinary matter did not comply with the procedural requirements stipulated in articles 973, 974, 975, and 983 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Regeste Legislator
Généré par l'IAarticle 973 du code de procédure civile, article 974 du code de procédure civile, article 975 du code de procédure civile, article 983 du code de procédure civile; Appeal Inadmissibility Due to Procedural Non-Compliance in Disciplinary Matter: The court declared the appeal inadmissible because, absent a specific exception, an appeal to the Court of Cassation must be submitted via a declaration signed by an attorney practicing before the Council of State and the Court of Cassation, and the filing in this disciplinary matter did not comply with the procedural requirements stipulated in articles 973, 974, 975, and 983 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
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'IACited in the context of the general rules for filing an appeal, which ultimately leads to the declaration of inadmissibility.
Cited in the context of the general rules for filing an appeal, which ultimately leads to the declaration of inadmissibility.
Cited in the context of the general rules for filing an appeal, which ultimately leads to the declaration of inadmissibility.
Cited in the context of the general rules for filing an appeal, which ultimately leads to the declaration of inadmissibility.
The failure to observe the requirement of representation by a lawyer for filing the appeal made it inadmissible.
The failure to observe the requirement of representation by a lawyer for filing the appeal made it inadmissible.
The failure to observe the requirement of representation by a lawyer for filing the appeal made it inadmissible.
The failure to observe the requirement of representation by a lawyer for filing the appeal made it inadmissible.
Texte complet
LA COUR DE CASSATION, PREMIÈRE CHAMBRE CIVILE, a rendu l'arrêt suivant :
Sur la recevabilité du pourvoi :
Vu les articles 973, 974, 975 et 983 du code de procédure civile ;
Attendu que, sauf disposition contraire, le pourvoi est formé par déclaration au greffe de la Cour de cassation signée par un avocat au Conseil d'Etat et à la Cour de cassation ;
Attendu que le 18 août 2010, M. X... a déposé au greffe de la Cour de cassation un pourvoi contre une décision rendue le 23 juin 1992 par le Conseil supérieur de la magistrature réuni en formation disciplinaire ;
Attendu qu'aucune disposition ne dispense les parties du ministère d'un avocat au Conseil d'Etat et à la Cour de cassation pour former un pourvoi en matière disciplinaire ; qu'en conséquence le pourvoi formé par M. X... doit être déclaré irrecevable ;
PAR CES MOTIFS :
DECLARE IRRECEVABLE le pourvoi ;
Condamne M. X... aux dépens ;
Ainsi fait et jugé par la Cour de cassation, première chambre civile, et prononcé par le président en son audience publique du quatre novembre deux mille onze.