Lo spazio di lavoro basato sull'IA per i professionisti del settore legale
Prova gratis per 14 giorni (10 domande/giorno durante la prova)
OG 1995 28•Legal aid and security in judgment-modification actions
OG 1995 28Altro tribunale17 dic 1995Other
Estratto da Omnilex
The text states that, because the claimant was denied legal aid even in the appeal proceedings, he must first be required to pay an advance on the anticipated court costs in the judgment-modification action. If he does not pay on time, the default consequence under § 124 ZPO applies and the action has no effect against the defendant. Legal aid is therefore confined to the situation in which the claimant actually pays the advance. In actions mainly concerning official matters, no additional restriction by reserving a prior request for security is permissible under § 126 lit. b ZPO; however, the defendant may still ask for security under § 125(1)(b) ZPO in relation to a requested reduction of women’s maintenance.
§§ 123, 124, 125 Abs. 1 lit. b und 126 lit. b ZPO; court-cost advance and legal aid in a judgment-modification action. If legal aid is refused, the claimant may be required to advance the probable court costs; non-payment within the set period triggers the warned default consequence under § 124 ZPO, so that the filed action has no effect vis-à-vis the defendant. Legal aid may be limited to the situation in which the advance is actually paid. Where the proceedings predominantly concern official matters, no additional restriction by reserving a prior cost-security request is admissible under § 126 lit. b ZPO. The defendant’s separate statutory right to demand security under § 125 Abs. 1 lit. b ZPO remains unaffected in matters concerning the reduction of women’s maintenance.
Dem Kläger wurde die unentgeltliche Rechtspflege auch im Rekursverfahren verweigert. Daher ist von ihm nach § 123 Abs. 1 ZPO im angehobenen Urteilsabänderungsprozess ein Gerichtskostenvorschuss in der Höhe der mutmasslichen Gerichtskosten einzuverlangen. Wird dieser nicht fristgerecht geleistet, tritt die nach § 123 Abs. 3 ZPO anzudrohende Säumnisfolge gemäss § 124 ZPO ein, womit die bereits eingereichte Urteilsabänderungsklage keine Auswirkungen auf die Beklagte zeitigen würde. Faktischer Einlassungszwang bestünde erst, wenn der Kostenvorschuss tatsächlich bezahlt würde. Daher ist die unentgeltliche Rechtspflege zum vornherein auf den Fall zu beschränken, dass der Kläger den von ihm zu verlangenden Gerichtskostenvorschuss tatsächlich leistet. Erst wenn der Gerichtskostenvorschuss fristgerecht bezahlt wird, bedarf die beklagte Gegenpartei allenfalls der unentgeltlichen Rechtspflege.
Weil im angestrengten Urteilsabänderungsprozess mehrheitlich Offizialsachen zur Beurteilung stehen, kann nach § 126 lit. b ZPO keine weitere Einschränkung im Sinn eines Vorbehalts für ein vorgängig einzureichendes Kostensicherungsgesuch gemacht werden. Es steht der Beklagten jedoch frei, vom Kläger eine Sicherheitsleistung im Sinne von § 125 Abs. 1 lit. b ZPO zu verlangen, soweit eine Herabsetzung von Frauenalimenten beantragt ist.
Estratto da Omnilex
Whether a claimant denied legal aid must provide an advance for likely court costs in a judgment-modification action.
Yes. An advance for the likely court costs must be requested from the claimant under § 123(1) ZPO.
Because legal aid was also refused in the appeal proceedings, the claimant cannot be exempted from advancing the anticipated court costs.
Whether failure to pay the court-cost advance on time triggers the default consequence under § 124 ZPO and leaves the action without effect against the defendant.
Yes. If the advance is not paid within the prescribed time, the warned default consequence under § 124 ZPO applies, and the already filed action produces no effects toward the defendant.
There is no factual compulsion on the defendant until the advance is actually paid; the claim only becomes effective after timely payment of the advance.
Whether legal aid for the claimant must be limited from the outset to the situation in which the cost advance is actually paid.
Yes. Legal aid must be confined to the case that the claimant actually pays the required court-cost advance; only then may the defendant’s own need for legal aid arise.
Since the action has no effect before payment of the advance, legal aid need not cover a phase in which the defendant is not yet exposed to the proceedings.
Whether a further restriction in the form of a prior cost-security application can be imposed where the action mainly concerns official matters.
No. Under § 126 lit. b ZPO, no further restriction in the sense of a reservation for a previously filed cost-security request may be made.
Because the action predominantly concerns official matters, the court may not impose that additional limitation.
Whether the defendant may nevertheless request security from the claimant for a claim to reduce women’s maintenance.
Yes. The defendant remains free to seek security under § 125(1)(b) ZPO insofar as a reduction of women’s alimony is claimed.
The prohibition of an additional prior cost-security reservation does not eliminate the defendant’s separate statutory right to request security for that type of claim.
Collega Omnilex per cercare nel corpus legale dal tuo assistente IA.