In light of the principle of fairness in law, understood here as equivalent to the principle of legality, if an appellant and appointed counsel make conflicting statements about the proper defendant, does counsel\u2019s statement override the appellant\u2019s?<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
A difference between a party\u2019s statement and that of the party\u2019s special representative about the proper defendant in a claim under Article 2 of the Bulgarian State and Municipalities Liability for Damage Act does not constitute a defect in the statement of claim.<\/p>\n
Where the special representative clarifies the point after the claimant has made their submissions, the special representative\u2019s clarification should be given effect:<\/p>\n
The Supreme Court of Cassation of the Republic of Bulgaria, Fourth Civil Division, sitting in closed session on 31 October 2018, composed of:<\/p>\n
PRESIDING JUDGE:
\nSTOIL SOTIROV<\/p>\n
MEMBERS:
\nVASILKA ILIEVA, ZOYA ATANASOVA<\/p>\n
with the clerk and in the presence of the prosecutor, heard interlocutory civil case No. 3127\/2018, reported by Judge STOIL SOTIROV.<\/p>\n
The proceedings are under Article 274(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
THE COURT ORDERS:<\/strong><\/p>\n GRANTS leave for cassation review of appellate order No. 109 of 18 April 2018 in interlocutory civil case No. 139\/2018 of the Civil Division of the Veliko Tarnovo Court of Appeal.<\/p>\n UPHOLDS appellate order No. 109 of 18 April 2018 in interlocutory civil case No. 139\/2018 of the Civil Division of the Veliko Tarnovo Court of Appeal.<\/p>\n This order is final.<\/p>\n Interpretative Decision No. 5\/2013 of 15 June 2015 in interpretative case No. 5\/2013.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n .<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/article>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/article>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/article>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\nRelated judicial decisions:<\/i><\/h3>\n