Omission of Ruling and Remedies: Commentary on Order No. 18652 of 2024

The recent Order No. 18652 of July 8, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, offers an important reflection on the methods of appeal in cases of omission of ruling by the Regional Court of Public Waters. This decision is part of a complex legal context, where the distinction between the various available remedies can be crucial for the protection of the rights of the parties involved.

The Regulatory Context

The Court confirmed that, in case of omission of ruling, the remedy is not an appeal, but a request for rectification to be submitted to the same Regional Court, as established by Article 204 of Royal Decree No. 1775 of 1933. This rule, in fact, refers to the hypotheses provided for by Article 517 of the 1865 procedural code, which contemplates various situations in which a judgment may be flawed, including:

• Judgments that ruled on matters not requested;
• Judgments that awarded more than what was requested;
• Judgments that omitted to rule on certain parts of the claim;
• Judgments with contradictory provisions.

The Ruling's Summary

Request for Cassation - Allegation of Omission of Ruling - Admissibility - Exclusion - Request for Rectification - Necessity. In terms of appeals, against the omission of ruling by the Regional Court of Public Waters, the available remedy is not an appeal, but a request for rectification submitted to the same Regional Court, as provided by art. 204 of R.D. No. 1775 of 1933 (consolidated text on waters), which provides for a referential referral to the cases provided for by art. 517 of the 1865 procedural code, i.e., to the following hypotheses: if the judgment "has ruled on a matter not requested," "if it has awarded more than what was requested," "if it has omitted to rule on any part of the claim," and "if it contains contradictory provisions."

Final Considerations

Order No. 18652 of 2024 represents an important reference for the matter of appeals in the legal field, highlighting how the correct interpretation of the rules can significantly influence the legal strategy to be adopted in cases of judgments deemed incomplete or misleading. It is essential for legal professionals to be constantly updated on the latest rulings and jurisprudential interpretations to ensure effective and informed defense of their clients' rights.