الحكم الحضوري - الحكم الغيابي - الحكم الاعتباري الحضوري

TLDR;

This video provides a detailed explanation of the classification of judicial rulings in Algerian law, specifically focusing on:

• Contradictory rulings (judgments by default): These are rulings made in the presence of both parties or their representatives.
• Judgments by default: These are rulings made when the defendant fails to appear despite proper notification.
• Judgments considered as contradictory: These are rulings where the defendant was personally notified but failed to appear.

The lecture explains the conditions for each type of ruling, the relevant articles in the Algerian Code of Civil and Administrative Procedure, and the practical implications of these classifications.

• Explains three classifications of judicial rulings in Algerian law.
• Details the conditions for each type of ruling.
• Discusses the practical implications of these classifications.

Introduction [0:00]

The lecture begins by introducing the topic of judicial rulings and their classification, specifically focusing on contradictory rulings, judgments by default, and judgments considered as contradictory. These classifications are governed by articles 288 to 295 of the Algerian Code of Civil and Administrative Procedure. The lecture aims to provide a concise explanation of each category.

Contradictory Rulings (Judgments by Default) [1:26]

A contradictory ruling, or "jugement contradictoire," is a ruling where both the plaintiff and the defendant are present or represented. According to articles 288, 290, and 291 of the code, a ruling is considered contradictory in three situations:

1. Normal Attendance: When the parties are present in person, represented by agents, or submit written memoranda, the ruling is contradictory, even if they don't make oral submissions. The lecturer critiques the inclusion of "or submitted memoranda," suggesting it's redundant since presence implies the opportunity to make submissions.
2. Plaintiff's Absence: If the plaintiff doesn't attend without a legitimate reason, the defendant can request a ruling on the merits, which is then considered contradictory. This is seen as a penalty for the plaintiff's negligence. Some French legal scholars argue this should be termed a "deemed contradictory ruling" to differentiate it from cases where both parties are present.
3. Failure to Act: If a party present in court fails to perform a required action within the specified time, the judge can issue a contradictory ruling based on the case file. This is a penalty for failing to comply with procedural requirements. The lecturer notes this is somewhat redundant, as the presence of the party should logically result in a contradictory ruling.

Judgments by Default [11:56]

A judgment by default, or "jugement par défaut," occurs when the defendant fails to appear, as outlined in article 292. Two conditions must be met:

1. Absence: The defendant, their agent, or their lawyer must not be present.
2. Proper Notification: The defendant must have been properly notified of the hearing. This refers to "official proper notification" (تبليغ رسمي صحيح), not necessarily personal notification. Official proper notification means the notification was received by someone authorised to receive it on behalf of the defendant, such as a family member living with them.

If the notification is delivered to an authorised person (e.g., the defendant's wife), and the defendant still fails to appear, the resulting judgment is by default. If the authorised person refuses to accept the notification, article 412 requires the process server to post a notice at the court and municipality and send a registered letter with acknowledgment of receipt. In this case, the notification is considered personal, and any resulting judgment is considered contradictory. Some legal scholars argue that article 411(6) contradicts article 292 and should be disregarded in favour of general rules.

Judgments Considered as Contradictory [19:40]

A judgment considered as contradictory, or "jugement réputé contradictoire," is addressed in article 293. This occurs when the defendant is personally notified but fails to appear. The conditions are:

1. Personal Notification: The defendant must be personally served with the notification to appear.
2. Absence: The defendant, their agent, or their lawyer fails to attend the hearing.

If the defendant refuses to accept the notification or sign the acknowledgment, article 411 considers this as personal notification. Therefore, if the defendant then fails to appear, the judgment is considered contradictory.

Distinctions and Practical Implications [23:25]

The lecturer addresses two key questions:

1. What is the difference between a judgment considered as contradictory and a judgment by default?
   • Notification: A judgment by default involves official proper notification (someone else receives it), while a judgment considered as contradictory involves personal notification (the defendant receives it or refuses to receive it).
   • Appeal: A judgment by default is subject to opposition (المعارضة), while a judgment considered as contradictory is not.
2. Is there a practical significance to distinguishing between a contradictory judgment and a judgment considered as contradictory in Algerian law?

The lecturer argues that there is no practical difference in Algerian law. Both types of judgments are not subject to opposition. This distinction exists in French law, where it has practical implications, but Algerian law has not adopted these implications, rendering the distinction largely academic.