Defective Judicial Rulings and the Mechanism for Reviewing them Without Appeal

Abstract

Judicial rulings aim to end a dispute on the basis of which a lawsuit was filed, and judicial rulings are not issued except after careful consideration and scrutiny, as accuracy in issuing rulings is one of the most important characteristics that characterize judicial decisions, and judges are distinguished by characteristics that make it more wise and scientific, which makes their decisions far from the circle of doubt. Despite this, some judicial rulings may be ambiguous and lack clarity, or may include material errors, or judges may neglect to answer some requests in their decisions, which makes that decision or ruling vulnerable to appeal through the methods of appeal stipulated by the law, and for this reason the legislator tried to exclude those rulings. From the Department of Appeal and Reducing the Cases of Cassation of Judgments, he permitted the correction of those rulings by having the concerned parties review the courts that issued them.

Judgments are essentially valid, but as we said, their issuance may be accompanied by characteristics that make the ruling flawed in terms of application, as implementing those rulings in the implementation department will not be an easy matter and is fraught with difficulty, as the ambiguity of the judicial ruling or its inclusion of a material error will not enable the just executor to implement that ruling. In accordance with the principle of achieving justice, therefore, we are trying, through this research, to address the cases through which the law has permitted the correction of judicial rulings to reach the stage of perfection that brings the desired justice to its owner. Our approach to this topic will be in accordance with the defective judicial rulings and the mechanism for correcting them, away from the methods of appeal.