CanonLaw.Ninja

A resource for both professional and armchair canonists.

Also including the GIRM, GILH, CCC, CCEO, DC, SST, ESI, USCCB Norms, and Vos estis.

Search

  • Section Numbers
  • Text Search    

  • Documents
  •  

   

Document

Processes » The Penal Process » Action to repair damages
Canon 1729. §1 In accordance with can. 1596, a party who has suffered harm from an offence can bring a contentious action for making good the harm in the actual penal case itself.

§2 The intervention of the harmed party mentioned in §1 is no longer admitted if the intervention was not made in the first instance of the penal trial.

§3 An appeal in a case concerning harm is made in accordance with cann.
1628--1640, even if an appeal cannot be made in the penal case itself. If, however, there is an appeal on both headings, there is to be only one trial, even though the appeals are made by different persons, without prejudice to the provision of Can.
1734[7].

§1. Pars laesa potest actionem contentiosam ad damna reparanda ex delicto sibi illata in ipso poenali iudicio exercere, ad normam can. 1596.

§2. Interventus partis laesae, de quo in §1, non amplius admittitur, si factus non sit in primo iudicii poenalis gradu.

§3. Appellatio in causa de damnis fit ad normam can. 1628-1640, etiamsi appellatio in poenali iudicio fieri non possit; quod si utraque appellatio, licet a diversis partibus, proponatur, unicum fiat iudicium appellationis, salvo praescripto can. 1730.
Canon 1730. §1 To avoid excessive delays in a penal trial, the judge can postpone the trial concerning harm until he has given a definitive judgement in the penal trial.

§2 When the judge does this he must, after giving judgement in the penal trial, hear the case concerning harm, even though the penal trial is still pending because of a proposed challenge to it, or even though the accused has been acquitted, when the reason for the acquittal does not take away the obligation to make good the harm.

§1. Ad nimias poenalis iudicii moras vitandas potest iudex iudicium de damnis differre usque dum sententiam definitivam in iudicio poenali protulerit.

§2. Iudex, qui ita egerit, debet, postquam sententiam tulerit in poenali iudicio, de damnis cognoscere, etiamsi iudicium poenale propter propositam impugnationem adhuc pendeat, vel reus absolutus sit propter causam quae non auferat obligationem reparandi damna.
Canon 1731. A judgement given in a penal trial, even though it has become an adjudged matter, in no way creates a right for a party who has suffered harm, unless this party has intervened in accordance with can. 1733 [8]

Sententia lata in poenali iudicio, etiamsi in rem iudicatam transierit, nullo modo ius facit erga partem laesam, nisi haec intervenerit ad normam can. 1729.

Page generated in 0.0034 seconds.