Abstract

In the first months after the amendment of the Code of Civil Procedure many practical doubts have been revealed. This concerns such issues as the duty to attach a copy of the power of attorney for the opposite party, the stamp duty on such a copy of the power of attorney, acceptance of late arguments or evidence when it does not prolong the procedure, as well as the taxation aspects of a “specified sum of money”. With regard to filing a copy of the power of attorney it should be recognized that as the notion of “an act procedure” is broader than “a procedural writ” it implies that frequently such a duty may apply still before such a procedural writ is filed. The analysis of the Stamp Duty Act leads to a conclusion that its interpretation that there is no obligation to pay stamp duty on the copy of the power of attorney filed via court since it is meant for the opposite party and only filed through a court is defendable.

As regards acceptance of late statements and evidence, I am in favour of relative perception of a delay in proceedings. This involves the need to compare the duration of the proceedings when late arguments and evidence are accepted with its duration when those arguments and evidence are submitted on time. The hitherto practice shows that a specific tendency is already taking shape in this area. Namely, filing of a late motion to accept documentary evidence concerning the arguments raised in due time is not deemed as causing a delay in considering the case. “A specified sum of money” adjudicated to the creditor from the debtor, which it to recompense the creditor for debtor’s dilatoriness, should be tax exempt pursuant to the Personal Income Tax Act. This is due to its legal nature and the reason for tax exemptions relating to compensations and damages, despite the fact that the condition that the compensation is a result of a court verdict or settlement has not been met.