Title — 1917 Code of Canon Law
Title XI: Of Incidental Causes
Superseded as law in 1983 — read why this Code still matters. Each canon links to its 1983 counterpart.
An incidental cause is had whenever, after judgment has been begun at least by citation, a question is proposed by one of the parties, or by the promoter of justice or defender of the bond if they are present in the judgment, which, although it is not expressly contained in the libellus by which the litigation is introduced, nevertheless so pertains to the cause that it generally must be resolved before the principal question.
Causa incidens habetur, quoties, incepto saltem per citationem iudicio, ab una ex partibus aut a promotore iustitiae vel vinculi defensore, si iudicio intersint, quaestio proponitur quae, tametsi libello, quo lis introducitur, non contineatur expresse, nihilominus ita ad causam pertinet ut resolvi plerumque debeat ante quaestionem principalem.
1983 Code correlation: can. 1587
An incidental cause is proposed either orally or by libellus, with the bond which exists between it and the principal cause indicated, and with the rules established in can. 1706-1725 observed insofar as this can be done.
Causa incidens proponitur vel oretenus vel per libellum, indicato nexu qui intercedit inter ipsam et causam principalem, et servatis, quoad eius fieri poterit, regulis can. 1706-1725 statutis.
1983 Code correlation: can. 1588
Once the libellus or verbal petition has been received, and the parties having been heard, and, if there is need, the promoter of justice or defender of the bond, the judge is to deliberate with himself whether the proposed incidental question is futile and raised only to delay the principal judgment; and likewise whether the incidental cause is of such a nature and coheres by such a bond with the principal cause that it must be resolved before it. If the matter is so, he is to admit the libellus or instance; otherwise he is to reject it by his decree.
Iudex, libello vel petitione verbali receptis, auditis partibus, et, si opus sit, promotore iustitiae, vel vinculi defensore, secum deliberet num proposita incidens quaestio futilis sit et ad retardandum principale iudicium unice excitata; itemque num causa incidens talis sit naturae et tali nexu cum causa principali cohaereat, ut ante eam resolvi debeat. Si ita se res habeat, libellum vel instantiam admittat; aliter decreto suo eam reiiciat.
1983 Code correlation: can. 1589
§ 1. Whether the incidental question which is raised must be defined with the judicial form observed, or by mere decree, the judge is to estimate with attention to the quality and gravity of the matter.
§ 2. If the incidental cause must be defined judicially, the rules which obtain in ordinary trials are to be observed insofar as this can be done; nevertheless the judge is to take care that the terms of delays be as brief as possible.
§ 3. In the decree by which, without the judicial form being observed, he either rejects or defines the incidental question, the judge is to set forth briefly the reasons on which he relies, in law and in fact.
§ 1. Utrum incidens quae excitetur quaestio, definienda sit iudicii forma servata, an mero decreto, iudex, attenta rei qualitate et gravitate, aestimet.
§ 2. Si causa incidens sit iudicialiter definienda, regulae, quoad eius fieri poterit, servandae sunt, quae in ordinariis iudiciis obtinent; curet tamen iudex ut dilationum termini sint quam maxime breves.
§ 3. Iudex in decreto quo, non servata iudicii forma, vel reiicit vel definit quaestionem incidentem, rationes quibus innititur, in iure et in facto breviter exponat.
1983 Code correlation: can. 1589-90
Before the principal cause is finished, the judge can, with a just cause intervening, correct or revoke an interlocutory sentence either of himself, after the parties have been heard, or at the instance of one party after the other party has been heard, and with the vote of the promoter of justice or defender of the bond always required, if they are present.
Antequam finiatur causa principalis, iudex interlocutoriam sententiam potest, iusta intercedente causa, corrigere aut revocare sive ex se, auditis partibus, sive ad instantiam unius partis audita altera parte, et requisito semper voto promotoris iustitiae aut defensoris vinculi, si adsint.
1983 Code correlation: can. 1591
Within this title
- Chapter I: Of Contumacycann. 1842–1851
- Chapter II: Of the Intervention of a Third Party in the Causecann. 1852–1853
- Chapter III: Of Attempted Acts While a Lawsuit Is Pendingcann. 1854–1857