Objective 3.2. The verdict of the Regional Court at sinners

The sale of this product is temporarily suspended.

Sold: 2
Refunds: 0

Uploaded: 08.02.2012
Content: 36.doc (27 kB)


Objective 3.2.
The verdict of the Regional Court Greshnev was convicted of embezzlement and sentenced to a long imprisonment with confiscation of all property belonging to him. After the entry into force of the sentence the convict's wife appealed to the district court to exclude from the inventory of the property of a number of items, including televisions, refrigerators and cars. Greshnevo claimed that these things are her premarital property, and presented to the court the relevant evidence. This fact is confirmed by the court questioned witnesses. The court rejected the claim.
Judicial board on civil cases of the Regional Court examined the case on appeal Greshnevo, the District Court has canceled and terminated the proceedings, considering that, as in the sentence specific item of property subject to confiscation, claims of third parties on this property can not be considered in the order civil proceedings and those claiming their rights to it can only raise the question of revision in this part of the sentence in a criminal case. Is the decision of the district court and the determination of the regional court? To what extent mandatory sentence for a court considering a civil case?


No feedback yet.
1 month 3 months 12 months
0 0 0
0 0 0
In order to counter copyright infringement and property rights, we ask you to immediately inform us at support@plati.market the fact of such violations and to provide us with reliable information confirming your copyrights or rights of ownership. Email must contain your contact information (name, phone number, etc.)