Praxis Watch

Monday, 16 September 2013

Courts behind Schedule in the Procedures for Determination of Time and Place of Birth

During the first year of implementation of the Law on Amendments to the Law on Non-Contentious Procedure, a number of persons, who had been unsuccessfully conducting administrative procedures for subsequent birth registration for years, managed to get registered in birth registry book on the basis of a court decision. However, despite the great significance that the procedure for determination of time and place of birth has for legally invisible persons, during the first year of implementation of the Law certain difficulties in conducting these procedures have were notices.

The length of the procedures before courts is one of the problems. In one of Praxis’ cases, the decision has not been brought even a year after filing a motion. The delay in the procedures is further caused by requests of some courts to the competent bodies to perform adequate checks about a person whose birth is being proven only after the first hearing (sometimes even after the second hearing), even though these checks should be requested immediately upon receiving the motion.

Even greater problems are caused by the courts which postpone the hearings because they were not delivered, within the legally prescribed deadline, the reports from the Ministry of Interior or other body from which the checks had been requested about a person whose time and place of birth were being determined. Even though in such cases it should be assumed that there are no data about the person whose birth is being proven, some courts extend deadlines for delivery of reports to the bodies from which the checks are requested and postpone the hearings.

Read 4760 times
Tagged under
Praxis means action
Praxis means action
Praxis means action
Praxis means action