No- Objection in Palestinian Civil Procedure

The judicial judgment are looked upon as epitome for truth as well as an argument with what was issued with them among the parties of the lawsuits. Yet، this plea , despite being confined to the sides of the case, it might transcend them to touch the right of personnel who were not antagonists in the suit initially. And because the usual processes of appeal do not relieve whoever was not an opponent in the lawsuit to defend his right which were touched by the judicial sentence، the law has legislated an approach for appealing in the judicial orders that allows appealing in the mannar of the others oppositions against the judgment . It is Known that the methods of appeaing in the judgment are " the means for the sides of conflicts and others to complain against the judicial sentences harming their interests for the sak of reaching to better conclusions" and the annulment of judgments to any mistake already committed will be throughout one of the ways that are lawfully projected according to the stipulations and periods being lawfully fixed. The jurisdiction differentiates between canceled judgments likely to be appealed against them and the non-existent ones which are likely to be denied in addition to appealing against them. The researcher concluded to identifying the opposition of the others as a way already planned by the legislator to appeal against the judicial judgments according to cases and conditions drawn by the Law to a person who was not an opponent or representative in the suit duly judged in the aim of canceling the judgment or modifying it. The researcher as well adds that the opposition of the others outsid the conflict in the resut , according to the law rules of the Palestinian civil and commercial judgments، is an extra ordinary appeal of the judicial judgment. The researcher , further more, dealt in his research with two kinds of the others objection, where he distinguishes between two kinds of the others objection: A- The others not original objection already submitted in the court that has issued the objected judgment, where the protestor takes the character of the plaintiff initiating the appeal against the judgment. B- The others not accidental objection , where one of the conflict side display it during the hearing of the suit to prove his claiming. This appeal is being presented to the court that discusses the new conflict. The researcher showed that the Palestinian legislator has adopted the first kind of appealing. He distinguished as well between the appealing with the judicial judgments in general and the appealing with the objection of the others. He stated also the major differences between them besides to what might be resulted from that. Likewise، the researcher discussed the stipulations of the others objection، such as the conditions mandated to be existent in the protestation, or those obliged to be found in the judgment that is objected against it, and traces pertinent to submitting the objection of the others. Then , the researcher concluded out of it that the conditions obliged to be existent in protestation being from the others, who are enumerated as each person who: A- Was not an antagonist in the conflict in the lawsuit. B- Was not a representative in the conflict fro one of its sides. C- The consolidated creditors in the debtors as well as the creditors with a commitment that is not likely to be divided if the judgment was based on cheating or tricking. D- The creditor and debtors with commitment that is not likely to be divided pertaining to judgment having been issued against the debtor or creditor with this commitment. E- The inheritors if one of them has represented them in the lawsuit of their inheritor or against him if thy verified that judgment was issued on the basis of cheating or tricking by this representative. The researcher afterwards stressed on the conditions of mandatory availability in the judgment that is being objected against. He stated the jurisprudential adversity already circulating on the legality to appeal in the preliminary judments issued in the case.He showed that the Palestinian legislator in Article (192) did not ratify appealing in the introductory decrees issued during the procedure of the lawsuit، where the dispute has not ended. The researcher has manipulated the discrepancy that’s still standing on the permission of appeaing in the civil section of the penal suit، and he has supported the point of view that does not deny ap[ealing in these judgment in support of Article (242) from the law origin of the Palestinian civil and commercial judgments. Likewise، he has dealt with the difference being held on the legality of appealing in the judments of cassation court via the objection of others versus its lacking ،and he has stated as well that the Palestinian legislator did not allow the appealing with the objection of others in the judgments of the cassation court. He has also discussed the interaction of submitting the objection of others relating initially with the court specialized with viewing the objection as well as the interval of time to its viewing and the opinion of the Palestinian cassation court concerning the issue of specialized reference to view the objection of others specifically after amending the law of principles and replacing the law rudiments of the Palestinian civil and commercial judgment in place of the rules law of the Jordanian juristic judgments and the law of the Jordanian civil magistrate courts. The researcher has also dealt with the time interval destined to raise a lawsuit for the objection of others and the main inclusions obliged to be mentioned in the draft of objection. Lastly , he treated the traces assigned to raising the objection of others and traces of this appeal.