Comments to Article 418. Consequences of non-attendance at the court session of persons participating in the case of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan
1. In case of non-appearance at the court session of the court of appeal of any of the persons participating in the case who have not been properly notified of the time and place of the case, the court shall postpone the hearing of the case.
2. The non-appearance of the persons indicated in the first part of this Article, duly notified of the time and place of the hearing of the case, is not an obstacle to the hearing of the case. However, the court has the right in these cases, recognizing the reasons for non-appearance as valid, to postpone the hearing of the case.
3. When adjourning the hearing of a case, the court of appeal shall duly notify the persons participating in the case of the time and place of the hearing of the case. The retrial continues if the persons involved in the case do not insist on the trial from the very beginning.
1. Proper notification of the persons participating in the case about the time and place of consideration of the case is an important condition for ensuring a person's right to judicial protection. In this regard, the legislator imposes on the court of appeal the obligation to properly notify the participants in the case about the trial. At the court hearing, the court must check the attendance of the persons involved in the case, find out the reason for the absence of the absent persons, and whether they were properly notified of the trial. If the participants in the case fail to appear due to their improper notification, the court must postpone the trial.
2. The non-appearance of the persons participating in the case who have been notified of the court proceedings does not prevent the court from considering the case. The court may postpone the hearing of the case if it recognizes the reason for the non-appearance as valid.
3. Part three of the commented article contains a new provision stating that the retrial continues if the persons involved in the case do not insist on the proceedings from the very beginning. In contrast to the stated provision, the earlier version of the third part of Article 352 of the CPC established the rule on the trial of the case from the beginning.
LIBRARY OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN
Astana, 2016
UDC 347 (574)
By 63
ISBN 978-601-236-042-4
Constitution Law Code Standard Decree Order Decision Resolution Lawyer Almaty Lawyer Legal service Legal advice Civil Criminal Administrative cases Disputes Defense Arbitration Law Company Kazakhstan Law Firm Court Cases
