Canon 1732. Whatever is laid down in the canons of this section concerning decrees, is also to be applied to all singular administrative acts given in the external forum outside a judicial trial, except for those given by the Roman Pontiff himself or by an
Ecumenical Council.

Quae in canonibus huius sectionis de decretis statuuntur, eadem applicanda sunt ad omnes administrativos actus singulares, qui in foro externo extra iudicium dantur, iis exceptis, qui ab ipso Romano Pontifice vel ab ipso Concilio Oecumenico ferantur.

Canon 1733. §1 When a person believes that he or she has been injured by a decree, it is greatly to be desired that contention between that person and the author of the decree be avoided, and that care be taken to reach an equitable solution by mutual consultation, possibly using the assistance of serious-minded persons to mediate and study the matter. In this way, the controversy may by some suitable method be avoided or brought to an end.

§2 The Episcopal Conference can prescribe that in each diocese there be established a permanent office or council which would have the duty, in accordance with the norms laid down by the Conference, of seeking and suggesting equitable solutions.
Even if the Conference has not demanded this, the Bishop may establish such an office or council.

§3 The office or council mentioned in §2 is to be diligent in its work principally when the revocation of a decree is sought in accordance with can. 1734 and the time-limit for recourse has not elapsed. If recourse is proposed against a decree, the
Superior who would have to decide the recourse is to encourage both the person having recourse and the author of the decree to seek this type of solution, whenever the prospect of a satisfactory outcome is discerned.

§1. Valde optandum est ut, quoties quis gravatum se decreto putet, vitetur inter ipsum et decreti auctorem contentio atque inter eos de aequa solutione quaerenda communi consilio curetur, gravibus quoque personis ad mediationem et studium forte adhibitis, ita ut per idoneam viam controversia praecaveatur vel dirimatur.

§2. Episcoporum conferentia statuere potest ut in unaquaque dioecesi officium quoddam vel consilium stabiliter constituatur, cui, secundum normas ab ipsa conferentia statuendas, munus sit aequas solutiones quaerere et suggerere; quod si conferentia id non iusserit, potest Episcopus eiusmodi consilium vel officium constituere.

§3. Officium vel consilium, de quo in §2, tunc praecipue operam navet, cum revocatio decreti petita est ad normam can. 1734, neque termini ad recurrendum sunt elapsi; quod si adversus decretum recursus propositus sit, ipse Superior, qui de recursu videt, recurrentem et decreti auctorem hortetur, quotiescumque spem boni exitus perspicit, ad eiusmodi solutiones quaerendas.

Canon 1734. §1 Before having recourse, the person must seek in writing from its author the revocation or amendment of the decree. Once this petition has been lodged, it is by that very fact understood that the suspension of the execution of the decree is also being sought.

§2 The petition must be made within the peremptory time-limit of ten canonical days from the time the decree was lawfully notified.

§3 The norms in §§1 and 2 do not apply:

1° in having recourse to the Bishop against decrees given by authorities who are subject to him;

2° in having recourse against the decree by which a hierarchical recourse is decided, unless the decision was given by the Bishop himself ;

3° in having recourse in accordance with cann. 57 and 1735.

§1. Antequam quis recursum proponat, debet decreti revocationem vel emendationem scripto ab ipsius auctore petere; qua petitione proposita, etiam suspensio exsecutionis eo ipso petita intellegitur.

§2. Petitio fieri debet intra peremptorium terminum decem dierum utilium a decreto legitime intimato.

§3. Normae §§1 et 2 non valent:

1° de recursu proponendo ad Episcopum adversus decreta lata ab auctoritatibus, quae ei subsunt;

2° de recursu proponendo adversus decretum, quo recursus hierarchicus deciditur, nisi decisio data sit ab Episcopo;

3° de recursibus proponendis ad normam can. 57 et 1735.

Canon 1735. If, within thirty days from the time the petition mentioned in can. 1734 reaches the author of the decree, the latter communicates a new decree by which either the earlier decree is amended or it is determined that the petition is to be rejected, the period within which to have recourse begins from the notification of the new decree. If, however, the author of the decree makes no decision within thirty days, the time-limit begins to run from the thirtieth day.

Si intra triginta dies, ex quo petitio, de qua in can. 1734, ad auctorem decreti pervenit, is novum decretum intimet, quo vel prius emendet vel petitionem reiciendam esse decernat, termini ad recurrendum decurrunt ex novi decreti intimatione; si autem intra triginta dies nihil decernat, termini decurrunt ex tricesimo die.

Canon 1736. §1 In those matters in which hierarchical recourse suspends the execution of a decree, even the petition mentioned in can. 1734 has the same effect.

§2 In other cases, unless within ten days of receiving the petition mentioned in Can.
1734 the author of the decree has decreed its suspension, an interim suspension can be sought from the author’s hierarchical Superior. This Superior can decree the suspension only for serious reasons and must always take care that the salvation of souls suffers no harm.

§3 If the execution of the decree is suspended in accordance with §2 and recourse is subsequently proposed, the person who must decide the recourse is to determine, in accordance with can. 1737 §3, whether the suspension is to be confirmed or revoked.

§4 If no recourse is proposed against the decree within the time-limit established, an interim suspension of execution in accordance with §§1 and 2 automatically lapses.

§1. In iis materiis, in quibus recursus hierarchicus suspendit decreti exsecutionem, idem efficit etiam petitio, de qua in can. 1734.

§2. In ceteris casibus, nisi intra decem dies, ex quo petitio de qua in can. 1734 ad ipsum auctorem decreti pervenit, is exsecutionem suspendendam decreverit, potest suspensio interim peti ab eius Superiore hierarchico, qui eam decernere potest gravibus tantum de causis et cauto semper ne quid salus animarum detrimenti capiat.

§3. Suspensa decreti exsecutione ad normam §2, si postea recursus proponatur, is qui de recursu videre debet, ad normam can. 1737, §3 decernat utrum suspensio sit confirmanda an revocanda.

§4. Si nullus recursus intra statutum terminum adversus decretum proponatur, suspensio exsecutionis, ad normam §1 vel §2 interim effecta, eo ipso cessat.

Canon 1737. §1 A person who contends that he or she has been injured by a decree, can for any just motive have recourse to the hierarchical Superior of the one who issued the decree. The recourse can be proposed before the author of the decree, who must immediately forward it to the competent hierarchical Superior.

§2 The recourse is to be proposed within the peremptory time-limit of fifteen canonical days. In the cases mentioned in can. 1734 §3, the timelimit begins to run from the day the decree was notified; in other cases, it runs in accordance with Can.
1735.

§3 Even in those cases in which recourse does not by law suspend the execution of the decree, or in which the suspension is decreed in accordance with can. 1736 §2, the Superior can for a serious reason order that the execution be suspended, but is to take care that the salvation of souls suffers no harm.
[NB see Authentic Interpretation of canon 1737, 20.VI.1987]

§1. Qui se decreto gravatum esse contendit, potest ad Superiorem hierarchicum eius, qui decretum tulit, propter quodlibet iustum motivum recurrere; recursus proponi potest coram ipso decreti auctore, qui eum statim ad competentem Superiorem hierarchicum transmittere debet.

§2. Recursus proponendus est intra peremptorium terminum quindecim dierum utilium, qui in casibus de quibus in can. 1734, §3 decurrunt ex die quo decretum intimatum est, in ceteris autem casibus decurrunt ad normam can. 1735.

§3. Etiam in casibus, in quibus recursus non suspendit ipso iure decreti exsecutionem neque suspensio ad normam can. 1736, §2 decreta est, potest tamen gravi de causa Superior iubere ut exsecutio suspendatur, cauto tamen ne quid salus animarum detrimenti capiat.

Canon 1738. The person having recourse always has the right to the services of an advocate or procurator, but is to avoid futile delays. Indeed, an advocate is to be appointed ex officio if the person does not have one and the Superior considers it necessary. The Superior, however, can always order that the one having recourse appear in person to answer questions.

Recurrens semper ius habet advocatum vel procuratorem adhibendi, vitatis inutilibus moris; immo vero patronus ex officio constituatur, si recurrens patrono careat et Superior id necessarium censeat; semper tamen potest Superior iubere ut recurrens ipse compareat ut interrogetur.

Canon 1739. In so far as the case demands, it is lawful for the Superior who must decide the recourse, not only to confirm the decree or declare that it is invalid, but also to rescind or revoke it or, if it seems to the Superior to be more expedient, to amend it, to substitute for it, or to obrogate it.

Superiori, qui de recursu videt, licet, prout casus ferat, non solum decretum confirmare vel irritum declarare, sed etiam rescindere, revocare, vel, si id Superiori magis expedire videatur, emendare, subrogare, ei obrogare.