|Processes » Certain Special Processes » Matrimonial Processes » Cases to declare the nullity of marriage » The documentary process
|The instructor, insofar as possible, collects the proofs in a single session and establishes a time limit of fifteen days to present the observations in favor of the bond and the defense briefs of the parties, if there are any.
|§1 After he has received the acts, the diocesan bishop, having consulted with the instructor and the assessor, and having considered the observations of the defender of the bond and, if there are any, the defense briefs of the parties, is to issue the sentence if moral certitude about the nullity of marriage is reached. Otherwise, he refers the case to the ordinary method.
§2 The full text of the sentence, with the reasons expressed, is to be communicated to the parties as swiftly as possible.
§3 An appeal against the sentence of the bishop is made to the metropolitan or to the
Roman Rota; if, however, the sentence was rendered by the metropolitan, the appeal is made to the senior suffragan; if against the sentence of another bishop who does not have a superior authority below the Roman Pontiff, appeal is made to the bishop selected by him in a stable manner.
§4 If the appeal clearly appears merely dilatory, the metropolitan or the bishop mentioned in §3, or the dean of the Roman Rota, is to reject it by his decree at the outset; if the appeal is admitted, however, the case is remitted to the ordinary method at the second level.
|After receiving a petition proposed according to the norm of can. 1677, the diocesan bishop or the judicial vicar or a judge designated by him can declare the nullity of a marriage by sentence if a document subject to no contradiction or exception clearly establishes the existence of a diriment impediment or a defect of legitimate form, provided that it is equally certain that no dispensation was given, or establishes the lack of a valid mandate of a proxy. In these cases, the formalities of the ordinary process are omitted except for the citation of the parties and the intervention of the defender of the bond.
[NB see Authentic Interpretation of the former canon 1686 (pre-Mitis Iudex Dominus Iesus), 11.VII.1984]
Page generated in 0.0027 seconds.
Website code © 2020 (MIT License). Version 2.7.2 FAQ