Übersetzung für "Ordinary court" in Deutsch

Why ever should an ordinary court not decide on compensation in cases of doubt?

Only if the board is unsuccessful may recourse be had to the ordinary court.

A Moot Court is a fictional lawsuit at an ordinary or arbitral court.

The use of an alternative arbitration board is not a mandatory prerequisite for invoking the ordinary court of competent jurisdiction.

In Medieval Europe, for example, the removal of jumping parasites from the premises was an ordinary occupation of court servants.

Only if no amicable agreement can be reached here may the parties appeal to an ordinary court.

It is thus very important, as it will allow all creditors in Europe to recover their claims in a uniform way and more rapidly and cheaply than in ordinary court proceedings.

Moreover, in the preamble to the drafts of both agreements being discussed, there is an express reference to the principle of a fair trial, including a hearing by an impartial, ordinary court, and to the question of special courts, which do not fit in with the judicial legal culture of Europe and are a matter that we raise at every meeting and in all talks with the United States delegation.

In addition, consumers are unaware of or do not fully exploit the potential of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms and of mediation possibilities existing at national level as a cheaper (free or below € 50) and faster alternative to ordinary court proceedings.

The debtor on whom a European order for payment is made and served must be informed of the possibility of lodging opposition to the order and of the fact that, by virtue of lodging opposition in this way, the case is transferred to ordinary court proceedings.

The rejection shall not prevent the claimant from initiating ordinary court proceedings with regard to the same claim.

The Commission observes that the judgment of the Ordinary Court of Brescia of 8 July 2008 ordered Brandt Italia to repay EUR 8890878,02.

The intention now is to redesign the judicial system in its entirety, by dividing jurisdiction in such a way as to make the Court of Justice the genuine supreme court of the Union and to give the Court of First Instance, which would acquire autonomous status, general powers as an ordinary court.

In addition, if the arbitral decision is not subject to an appeal before the competent appellate court, it becomes definitive and has the same effects as a judgment handed down by an ordinary court.

Indeed, the very nature of payment order procedures is based on the concept that the substantive justification of a claim is – in contrast to ordinary court procedures – in principle not examined.

Even if that is so, the fact remains that where individuals intended — as the complainants did in the main proceedings — to rely on the, albeit optional, jurisdiction which the national legislature, when transposing Directive 1999/70, conferred on those specialised courts to hear and determine disputes arising from the 2003 Act, the principle of effectiveness requires that those individuals should also be able to seek before the same courts the protection of the rights which they can derive directly from the directive itself, if it should emerge from the checks undertaken by the referring court that the obligation to divide their action into two separate claims and to bring the claim based directly on the directive before an ordinary court leads to procedural complications liable to render excessively difficult the exercise of those rights conferred on the parties by Community law.