When does the accumulation of actions and procedures in contentious-administr...

taslima333

Under the institution of procedural accumulation , Law /, of July , regulating the Contentious-Administrative Jurisdiction (hereinafter, LJCA) provides, in articles to , a series of budgets for the processing and resolution joint, both of claims and resources. This instrument, created for reasons of procedural economy and legal certainty, allows joint processing, as well as the extension of the initial appeal to avoid the processing, and subsequent challenge, of closely linked sentences. Regarding resolutions that deal with accumulation, extension and preferential processing, the LJCA provides that only an appeal for reconsideration may be filed. II.- Cases of accumulation of actions in contentious-administrative proceedings The viability of the accumulation of actions in contentious-administrative proceedings is framed in article of the LJCA. Based on said provision, the appellant may accumulate in his claim the claims that he considers appropriate in relation to the same administrative act, general provision or administrative action.

Likewise, the appellant may accumulate in the same appeal the claims that arise from several acts, provisions or actions, when these are directly connected to each other. In one Cell Phone Number List way or another, the effectiveness of one of the acts must depend on the validity of the other, even without there being subordination of effects, as long as there is a relationship between the two in terms of subjects or content. However, in order to proceed with the accumulation of actions in contentious-administrative proceedings , a series of requirements and circumstances must be met that must be analyzed. Firstly, with respect to the jurisdictional body , the accumulation of actions in contentious-administrative proceedings will only be admissible when the jurisdiction to hear the different claims corresponds to the same Court or Tribunal. However, the accumulation of contentious-administrative actions against acts between which there is a direct connection has been allowed, despite the fact that the jurisdiction to hear them corresponds to different jurisdictional bodies.



In such cases, jurisdiction corresponds to the highest court. Secondly, in relation to the parties , it is necessary that the accumulation of actions in contentious-administrative proceedings be by the plaintiff actively legitimized to deduct all claims. Finally, the activity requirements require that the accumulation take place at the initiation of the process. III. Dismissal of the accumulation of actions in contentious-administrative proceedings When the appellant considers and requests the accumulation of the contentious-administrative actions , and the Lawyer of the Administration of Justice considers that the same is not appropriate, he will inform the Court or the Judge, so that he may order the appellant to file of the corresponding resources, separately, within a period of days. If they do not intervene, the Judge or Court will consider it expired. Although the accumulation of actions in contentious-administrative proceedings is a procedural instrument that the appellant has, the Judge or Court, aware of the process, has the power to decide whether or not said accumulation is appropriate. The question was raised to the Constitutional Court as to whether the rejection of the request for the consolidation of actions in contentious-administrative proceedings, by the jurisdictional body, represented an impediment to access to the right to effective judicial protection.