El blog de Maria

ads said:
Monday, January 11, 2016 @ 2:14 PM

Dear Maria,
When SC doctrine is established that acts as "clear case law" in this manner and on any specific aspect of Ley 57/68, would this clarification then entitle the claimant to be awarded full interest and costs associated with their claim, or could they still be denied full interest and costs?
Does there have to be SC doctrine established independently on the aspect of recovering full interest (backdated to payment dates) and again SC doctrine established on the aspect of recovering costs (for successful claimants) in this regard, before claimants can be deemed entitled to recover all these amounts and thereby make the Banks fully accountable?
Is there any legal point where entitlement to such compensation in recognition of Banks' negligences becomes part of the clarified law?

mariadecastro said:
Monday, January 11, 2016 @ 2:18 PM

Once Supreme Court sets Case Law Doctrine ( Doctrina jurisprudencial), a Judge cannot leave costs non-imposed for the reason of controverted character of the matter.

ads said:
Monday, January 11, 2016 @ 3:31 PM

Thank you so much for the clarification Maria.