Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

English (EN)·Polski (PL)·Yкраїнський (UK)
Przejdź do strony domowej biblioteki Centralna Biblioteka Wojskowa Link otwiera się w nowym oknie Logo biblioteki Prolib Integro - strona głównaCentralna Biblioteka Wojskowa

Wyszukujesz frazę "kanon 1095 §2 KPK" wg kryterium: Temat

  Lista filtrów
Wyrównaj
    Wyświetlanie 1-5 z 5
    Tytuł:
    Poważny brak rozeznania oceniającego (kan. 1095, n. 2 KPK) u powoda i wykluczenie przezeń nierozerwalności małżeństwa (kan. 1101 § 2 KPK) w wyroku Roty Rzymskiej c. Erlebach z 21.07.2016 r.
    Serious lack of discretion of judgement (canon 1905 § 2 of the Code of Canon Law) of the complainant and exclusion of the indissolubility of marriage because of it (canon 1101 § 2 of the Code of Canon Law) in in the light of the judgment of the Roman Rota
    Autorzy:
    Góralski, Wojciech
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/663455.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2017
    Wydawca:
    Uniwersytet Kardynała Stefana Wyszyńskiego w Warszawie
    Tematy:
    rozeznanie oceniające
    brak
    wykluczenie
    nierozerwalność małżeństwa
    wykluczenie nierozerwalności małżeństwa
    kanon 1095, n. 2 KPK
    kanon 1101 § 2 KPK
    discretion of judgement
    indissolubility of marriage
    exclusion of indissolubility of marriage
    canon 1095 n. 2 CIC/1983
    canon 1101 § 2 CIC/1983
    Opis:
    This case concerns a marriage concluded on 13 June 1987 in St. Nichola’s Church San Gemini in Interamnen.-Narnien.-Amerinae diocese, between a 37-years-old Paulus and 27-years-old Maria, who split up several years later.On 22 December 2009 Paulus launched an action for annulment of his marriage before the Tribunal of First Instance, providing exclusion of the indissolubility of marriage and later also lack of discretion of judgement on his side as reasons. On 28 October 2011, the Tribunal passed a pro vincula sentence in both reasons for annulment and the complainant immediately appealed to the Roman Rota.Turnus of the Rota c. Erlebach heard the case in the second instance and, on 21 July 2016, issued a decree of nullity of marriage because of both reasons. When it comes to the lack of discretion of judgement, the complainant’s lack of internal freedom (pathological jealousy and constant fear as well as dependence on his mother) has been observed. When proving the exclusion of the inseparability of marriage, the Tribunal drew attention both to the complainant’s testimony (judicial and non-judicial ones) as well as reasons for simulation and circumstances. The extensive sentences c. Erlebach is of great significance since it indicates the compatibility of two of the above mentioned reasons for nullity: defectus discretionis iudicii and simulatio consensus.
    Źródło:
    Ius Matrimoniale; 2017, 28, 2; 107-145
    1429-3803
    2353-8120
    Pojawia się w:
    Ius Matrimoniale
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Wyrok Sądu Kościelnego we Włocławku (c. Grzęźlikowski) z 13.10.1997 r. w sprawie o nieważność małżeństwa z tytułu poważnego braku rozeznania oceniającego co do istotnych praw i obowiązków małżeńskich (kan. 1095, n. 2 KPK)
    Sentence of church court in Wloclawek coram Gręźlikowski in case for nullity of marriage in virtue of lack of judging discernment regarding matrimonial rights and duties (can. 1095,2)
    Autorzy:
    Grzęźlikowski, c.
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/663541.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2003
    Wydawca:
    Uniwersytet Kardynała Stefana Wyszyńskiego w Warszawie
    Tematy:
    nieważność małżeństwa
    poważny brak rozeznania oceniającego
    prawa i obowiązki małżeńskie
    kanon 1095, n. 2 KPK
    nullity of marriage
    defect of discretion of judgment
    matrimonial rights and duties
    canon 1095 n. 2 CIC/1983
    Opis:
    Plaintiff brought a suit against his matrimony contracted with N. on 22nd of January 1984 in Saint Patrick's Cathedral in Auckland in New Zealand. N. in virtue of lack of judging discernment regarding matrimonial rights and duties on his side (can. 1095, 2 Code of Canonical Proeedings) suggesting that in was caused by fact that being on emigration in New Zealand, missing the country of origin and family, being mentally woebegone and being depressed, he had restricted will and critical cognizance and was not able to have evaluotion of matrimonial agreement subject and its free choice. He also thought that because of arisen situation and due to his individualistic immaturity in moment of contracting the matrimony, he had lack of judging discernment regarding the matrimonial rights and dubes. He lodged a complaint for nullity of marriage to the tribunal of his place of residence in March 1996. Defendant was living in England in that time. Tribunal Włocławek obtained - acco rding to canonic regulations 1673, 4 Code of C nonical Proceedings - a permission to wunduct a case from the tribunal of defendant's place of residence. Hearing of evidence induded hearing of the parties, witnesses and examination of the plaintiff by psychologist expert appointed by the wurt, who issued an opinion. Confronting the legal motives submitted in case with actual real motives, after taking the cognizance of plaintiffs notes after publishing the files of a case and before – sentence notes of the defender of matrimonial union, the board of judges passed a sentence in favour of validity of appealed marriage. It was found that: 1. plaintiff could be really actually mentally depressed, emotionally trembling, he missed his country and family, however that state was not as strong and serious to make him not to realize the fact of what the marriage was; 2. facts that he left Poland by himself and chose emigration by himself indicate that he was self-dependent and individualistically mature; 3. lack of discernment was not confirmed by testimonies of defendant and witnesses as well as circumstances of marriage contracting, its course and actual reasons of marriage breakdown; 4. expert appointed by the court found the plaintiff individualistically mature and found no reasons that would cause the plaintiff to have of ability of due judgment of what the matrimony is and which obligations it put him under as well as ability to express matrimonial consent; 5. plaintifs cognitive and volitive powers were able to evaluate correctly the resulted situation, correctly express matrimonial consent and express matrimonial consent in correct and volid way. Second Instance Tribunal from Gniezno confirmal a sentence of Tribunal form Włocławek suggesting the plaintiff to possibly lodge a complaint for nullity of marriage in virtue of simulation of matrimonial condent on his side.
    Źródło:
    Ius Matrimoniale; 2003, 14, 8; 231-241
    1429-3803
    2353-8120
    Pojawia się w:
    Ius Matrimoniale
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Poważny brak rozeznania oceniającego (kan. 1095 n. 2 KPK) oraz wykluczenie nierozerwalności małżeństwa (kan. 1101 § 2 KPK) w świetle wyroku Trybunału Roty Nuncjatury Apostolskiej w Hiszpanii c. Morán Bustos z 9 lipca 2007 r.
    Grave defect of discretion of judgment concerning (can. 1095 n 2 CCL) and exclude indissolubility marriage (can. 1101 § 2 CCL) under sentence of the Tribunal of the Rota of the Apostolic Nunciature in Spain c. Morán Bustos of 09 July 2007
    Autorzy:
    Białobrzeski, Tomasz
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/663135.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2013
    Wydawca:
    Uniwersytet Kardynała Stefana Wyszyńskiego w Warszawie
    Tematy:
    rozeznanie oceniające
    nierozerwalność małżeństwa
    wykluczenie nierozerwalności małżeństwa
    poważny brak rozeznania oceniającego
    kanon 1095 n. 2 KPK
    kanon 1101 § 2 KPK
    discretion of judgment
    indissolubility marriage
    exclusion of indissolubility of marriage
    grave defect of discretion of judgment
    canon 1095 n. 2 CIC/1983
    canon 1101 § 2 CIC/1983
    Opis:
    Presented sentence of the Tribunal of the Rota of the Apostolic Nunciature in Spain adjudicate definitely in II instance adjudication nulitatis matrimonii by virtue of grave defect of discretion of judgment concerning by both parties (can. 1101 § 2 CCL) and lack of the freedom internal also by both parties (can. 1095 n 2 CCL). The question which was considering concerned matrimony which was got in 15.03.1972. The libellus was lodged in 26.04.1996. Tribunal I instance in sentence of 15.11.2000 declared that there was no proved the nullity of the marriage. The petitioner lodged appeal to the Rote of the Spain. In 09.07.2009 the Rote declared the validity of the marriage.
    Źródło:
    Ius Matrimoniale; 2013, 24, 18; 233-246
    1429-3803
    2353-8120
    Pojawia się w:
    Ius Matrimoniale
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Poważny brak rozeznania oceniającego co do istotnych praw i obowiązków małżeńskich a nieważność małżeństwa (kan. 1095, n. 2)
    "Defectus discretionis iudicii" circa i diritti e i dovieri matrimoniali essenziali e nullità del matrimonio (can. 1095, n. 2)
    Autorzy:
    Góralski, Wojciech
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/663497.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    1990
    Wydawca:
    Uniwersytet Kardynała Stefana Wyszyńskiego w Warszawie
    Tematy:
    poważny brak rozeznania oceniającego
    prawa i obowiązki małżeńskie
    nieważność małżeństwa
    kanon 1095, n. 2 KPK
    grave defect of discretion of judgment
    matrimonial rights and duties
    nullity of marriage
    canon 1095 n. 2 CIC/1983
    Opis:
    Nel contrarre matrimonio non basta il semplice uso della ragione ma occorre "sufficiens discretio iudicii" seu "iudicii maturitas contractui proportionata" (Gasparri). Il grado di "discretio" sufficiente e necessario per poter contrarre validamente si detentiina in riferimento ai diritti ed obblighi essenziali che si debbono scambievolmente dare e ricevere nel porre in essere il matrimonio. La "discretion iudicii"non e che la capacità di intendere e di volere il matrimonio, e quindi di "eligere e deliberare" liberamente di porre in essere quest'atto. Il "defectus discretionis iudicii" pub essere causato delle nevrosi (neurastenia, psicastenia, isteria) o dalle psicopatie (nelle sue diverse forme). La giurisprudenza rotale ha sempre considerato che soltanto la nevrosi o la psicopatia grave pub impedire la "discretio iudicii" proporzionata al matrimonio. Tra le prove della mancanza della "discretio iudicii" un ruolo molto omportante si deve attribuire alle "peritio iudicia- lis" con la quale tuttavia il giudice non può essere determinato.
    Źródło:
    Ius Matrimoniale; 1990, 1; 33-57
    1429-3803
    2353-8120
    Pojawia się w:
    Ius Matrimoniale
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Poważny brak rozeznania oceniającego co do istotnych praw i obowiązków małżeńskich (kan. 1095 n. 2 KPK) w świetle wyroku Roty Rzymskiej "coram" Erlebach z 16 października 2008 r.
    A serious lack of the evaluative analysis regarding significant marital rights and obligations (can. 1095, n.2 of the Code of Canon Law) in view of a decision of the Roman Rota c. Erlebach of 16 October 2008
    Autorzy:
    Góralski, Wojciech
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/663133.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2013
    Wydawca:
    Uniwersytet Kardynała Stefana Wyszyńskiego w Warszawie
    Tematy:
    rozeznanie oceniające
    prawo i obowiązek małżeński
    poważny brak rozeznania oceniającego
    prawa małżeńskie
    obowiązek małżeński
    kanon 1095 n. 2 KPK
    marital rights
    conjugal duty
    grave defect of discretion of judgment
    canon 1095 n. 2 CIC/1983
    Opis:
    The author presents and comments on the Rotal decision (negative) issued in the second instance after appealing against the decision (positive) issued in the first instance (by one-man tribunal) by the respondent due to a serious lack of the evaluative analysis of both parties. The Rotal judge, after a thorough interpretation of the code-based expression discretio iudicii (including three elements), emphasizes that not always the lack of such analysis constitutes inability to come to a marital agreement. This inability shall constitute exclusively the serious lack of discretio iudicii, both in its internal and external aspects.
    Źródło:
    Ius Matrimoniale; 2013, 24, 18; 219-232
    1429-3803
    2353-8120
    Pojawia się w:
    Ius Matrimoniale
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
      Wyświetlanie 1-5 z 5

      Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies