No there do not appear to be any legal time constraints in place to protect from such abusive delays.
This in effect however is contrary to the Rule of Law which states the following (brace yourselves folks!!):
The rule of law is a system of rules and rights that enables fair and functioning societies. The World Justice Project defines this system as one in which the following four universal principles are upheld:
- The government and its officials and agents as well as individuals and private entities are accountable under the law.
- The laws are clear, publicized, stable, and just; are applied evenly; and protect fundamental rights, including the security of persons and property.
- The process by which the laws are enacted, administered, and enforced is accessible, fair,and efficient.
- Justice is delivered timely by competent, ethical, and independent representatives and neutrals who are of sufficient number, have adequate resources, and reflect the makeup of the communities they serve.
Marta Andreasen MEP has recently identified that "as part of the process of joining the EU, the institutions of a country are assessed against what are now known as the "Copenhagen Criteria", one of which is respect for the rule of law, and Spain would have been assessed as meeting these criteria at its accession in 1986 "
It certainly begs the question if the rule of law is now being compromised in this way then what happens if a member state no longer meets this criteria?
Marta also identified the following
"The EU Justice scoreboard is not meant to "identify...instances of consumer abuse" but to look at the effect of judicial institutions on economic growth and development across the Member States. "
Perhaps only when the EU recognise the effect of these realities impinging on economic growth by a growing awareness of Spain's failure to adhere to the Rule of Law and the damaging consequences on innocent people whose intention to invest in Spain has turned into a nightmare, will they be willing to act.
The irony however is that in the interim court taxes have been increased as a means to improve the situation, and these taxes impact those seeking justice. So we all have to wait to see how long these tax increases take to filter down to those who are now paying extra for the priviledge to receive what is rightfully already required as per the rule of law in the first place!! I wonder if these monies are being ring fenced to directly improve judicial efficiency, to provide adequate resources etc?
Keith's suggestion for a fast track court now seems eminently sensible (and far more efficient) as specialised judge(s) could whizz through many of these BG cases, gain consistent rulings to make the Banks accountable where applicable, provide disincentives for Banks to appeal by putting into effect speedy time constraints, and free up the courts in the process. Dream on as they say.....
So frustrating!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! .
This message was last edited by ads on 23/02/2014.