اسم المؤلف:
رحيم جاسم حمزة المعموري
اسم المشرف:
وسن قاسم الخفاجي
المستخلص:
Litigation between two parties usually starts two plaintiff and the defendant, may begin multilateral, is diversity in this case a multiplicity an original, such as lawsuits brought by the heirs of the creditor to demand the right to the deceased, or that is raised several claims linked to each other of several plaintiffs against the defendant and one, or from one plaintiff against several defendants, it may also begin rivalry from one plaintiff and one defendant and become during its work multi adversaries, and so it is called the evolution of the adversarial and breadth it scope, in terms of people, and it happens during the intervention of someone from outside their rivalry, or to be adversarial person by opponents outside the court or from the original also rivalry.In this case the rivalry will be differentiated and unstable, so do not remain constant as began, since rivalry is a set of procedures to start judicial claim down to the completing on the subject issued terminator it judgment, or termination without judgment such as the magistrate or leave ..., and the multiplicity these actions inside rivalry and relay sequence chronologically and logically, so that no work of this business to achieve the final result, which is obtaining a ruling to resolve the dispute, and for each person on the right, but by concerted this business with each other, and remain coherent and for access the desired claim of result It is getting a fair and facilitator rule and at the lowest cost and workable on the ground, any possibility of its implementation, and the implementation of the rule after its release from the court after exhausting all remedies intended by the legislature, that does not conflict with another decision issued by the same court or another court.And gets conflict and contradiction in judgments when there is a dispute before the court of first instance, and issue a ruling where, and this multilateral rivalry - consists of several plaintiffs or defendants , and some accept by virtue of this courtor miss on the same appeal dates, and challenged others - sentenced them or convicted - judgment, in which case we will be in front of two provisions in one subject, and increasingly thread complicated when the subject of the litigation is indivisible, where you can not implement two provisions together, such the lawsuit brought by partners group on the common for claiming a right of easement on the land of others, are listed first instance court the lawsuit, and some based partners to challenge governance without the others, and it was decided to appeal against the court of easement in favor of the appellants, and the other rejects this right, and that's where the subject of adversarial one, we will be - here - in front of the impossibility of implementation, because the decision can not be located and it does not exist in time one and the same subject.Here we must preserve the unity of the rivalry in order to benefit realized from the implementation of the verdicts, maintaining the unity of the rivalry of the fragmentation is in several ways, including allowing intervention as well as the acceptance of the crossbar applications, and to accept all of this is within a certain link and the link between the discounts, rather than be held every suit individually, or if there were several discounts and had among them a link from any element court can order the assignment to collect them in front of one court, whether pending before different tribunals, or order annexation if the front of one court, these means - Referral and annexation - we can to keep our rivalry coherent until the end, unity of the rivalry in a civil litigation means that are being investigated by the court per antagonism or discounts related to the same court, and legal actions that take place in the rivalry remains sequential so that they can not get a final judgment unless complete all these works.The idea of the unity of antagonism stand out in the interest of the relay for this business, unity is a must if we want to get the rule, which is the main goal to resolve the dispute, and that stipulated by the Iraqi legislature when he clarify to take advantage of sequence provisions challenged by opponents whodid not contest governance, is to keep this unit, and we believe it is not sufficient to maintain the unity of the antagonism, unity is achieved when it is adversarial rest of opponents who did not join the appeal antagonism, and should be joining to the antagonism was keeping this unit from retail, and whether they are doomed or is doomed to them.And the behavior of these methods will preserve the unity of the antagonism, instead of that all the antagonism going on its way, the unification - related discounts before one court, If you set up multiple discounts and had them link, the act together these discounts which facilitate the separation of the once and by virtue of one, and that it achieves the overall fairness and certainty of a conflict and contradiction verdicts.Some legislations comparison location has gone in this direction, to maintain the unity of the antagonism, and made his opponents appeal the same breadth, which was in a feud first degree, which in this measure kept legislator on the unit stay where began, and allowed the appearance of opponents who were in a feud first degree of join the dispute appeal even though they are considered foreigners by, through this measure be legislator has kept the antagonism of the fragmentation, and allowed the opponents who have missed the appeal of joining the appeal raised from one of their colleagues, and that did not join ordered the appellant court to be an adversary to them, in order to be re - balance positions liabilities especially when diversity, only thus allowing opponents or pursuant to court order adversary of no contest have been kept on this unit, to be a judgment after that ending the conflict in all its branches and its ramifications, and prevention of stirring the dispute again, and so the interest of this unit namely the economy achieved time and reduce costs and facilitate litigation procedures and get away from the verdicts opposed.
