Notes the decision issued by the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court, dated 23/07/2009, with presentation of Judge Carmen Zuleta de Merchán, that:
"From a constitutional perspective, the activity authorization procedure to be temporarily relieved of living together is not a discretionary act, as bad as Superior Court affirmed the First Civil, Commercial and Transit District of the Metropolitan Area of \u200b\u200bCaracas. Approval Judge's strict contracts to record, formally, the term of the temporary separation, which leads to state that this is not a voluntary withdrawal (one case) or a prolonged rupture of the common life (in another), but unlike the sustained up to this opportunity by the Board in the decision N ° 5135/2005, the issuance of this authorization it is necessary to notify the other spouse. "
Likewise, and without prejudice to the binding nature of that decision, it had a dissenting opinion of Judge Rafael Rondón Haaz PEDRO , who said:
"On the other hand, the sentencing majority noted that the authorization procedure for the temporary separation of the common residence, once it is agreed it must notify the other spouse. In this sense, who disagrees considers that the Code of Civil Procedure Article 900, stipulates that in proceedings of voluntary jurisdiction, if any interested party on request, be ordered to be acknowledged before it is agreed that so that the third party to exercise its right of defense. So that those who differ not understand why, in the case of approval of temporary separation from the common residence, are not given a statutory provision that provides more guarantees than those given in the ruling. "
0 comments:
Post a Comment