Anonymous
Aug 29
Distinguish Article 70 of ethiopian civil procedure and article 233 of ethiopian civil procedure?
Ethiopian Civil procedure code
1 view
1 view
2 answers
Sort By
ChatGPT
Aug 29
Article 70 of the Ethiopian Civil Procedure Code deals with the power of the court to order the consolidation of separate actions that involve a common question of law or fact. The court may order the consolidation of such actions in order to avoid unnecessary costs and delays.
On the other hand, Article 233 of the Ethiopian Civil Procedure Code deals with the power of the court to order the joinder of parties in a civil action. The court may order the joinder of parties if their presence is necessary in order to effectively adjudicate the dispute or if their rights or liabilities are so connected that it would be just and convenient to hear the case together.
In summary, Article 70 deals with the consolidation of separate actions, while Article 233 deals with the joinder of parties in a civil action.
On the other hand, Article 233 of the Ethiopian Civil Procedure Code deals with the power of the court to order the joinder of parties in a civil action. The court may order the joinder of parties if their presence is necessary in order to effectively adjudicate the dispute or if their rights or liabilities are so connected that it would be just and convenient to hear the case together.
In summary, Article 70 deals with the consolidation of separate actions, while Article 233 deals with the joinder of parties in a civil action.
0
Google Gemini AI
Aug 29
Article 70 of the Ethiopian Civil Procedure Code
- Purpose: To provide for the issuance of a default judgment when the defendant fails to appear in court or file a defense within the specified time limit.
- Key Provisions:
- If the defendant fails to appear or file a defense within the time limit, the plaintiff can file a motion for default judgment.
- The court will issue a default judgment if it determines that the plaintiff's allegations are supported by evidence.
- The default judgment is binding on the defendant and cannot be appealed unless the defendant can show a valid reason for their absence or failure to file a defense.
Article 233 of the Ethiopian Civil Procedure Code
- Purpose: To provide for the reopening of a case after a default judgment has been issued.
- Key Provisions:
- The defendant can file an application to reopen the case if they can provide a valid reason for their absence or failure to file a defense.
- Valid reasons include absence due to illness, an accident, or force majeure.
- The court will consider the defendant's application and decide whether to reopen the case.
Key Differences:
- Purpose: Article 70 provides for the issuance of a default judgment, while Article 233 provides for its reopening.
- Timing: Article 70 is applied when the defendant fails to appear or file a defense within the time limit, while Article 233 is applied after a default judgment has been issued.
- Requirement of a valid reason: Under Article 70, the defendant is not required to provide a valid reason for their absence or failure to file a defense. However, under Article 233, the defendant must show a valid reason to reopen the case.
- Purpose: To provide for the issuance of a default judgment when the defendant fails to appear in court or file a defense within the specified time limit.
- Key Provisions:
- If the defendant fails to appear or file a defense within the time limit, the plaintiff can file a motion for default judgment.
- The court will issue a default judgment if it determines that the plaintiff's allegations are supported by evidence.
- The default judgment is binding on the defendant and cannot be appealed unless the defendant can show a valid reason for their absence or failure to file a defense.
Article 233 of the Ethiopian Civil Procedure Code
- Purpose: To provide for the reopening of a case after a default judgment has been issued.
- Key Provisions:
- The defendant can file an application to reopen the case if they can provide a valid reason for their absence or failure to file a defense.
- Valid reasons include absence due to illness, an accident, or force majeure.
- The court will consider the defendant's application and decide whether to reopen the case.
Key Differences:
- Purpose: Article 70 provides for the issuance of a default judgment, while Article 233 provides for its reopening.
- Timing: Article 70 is applied when the defendant fails to appear or file a defense within the time limit, while Article 233 is applied after a default judgment has been issued.
- Requirement of a valid reason: Under Article 70, the defendant is not required to provide a valid reason for their absence or failure to file a defense. However, under Article 233, the defendant must show a valid reason to reopen the case.
0
