Preinačujuća presuda i presuda iznenađenja

Not every decision of the appellate court varying first instance judgement which comes as an unpleasant surprise to either party necessarily constitutes what is known a judgment (German: Überraschungsurteil). On contrary, should only be rare, undesired exception. A may considered surprised if changed legal classification case from that in original into one diligent could not reasonably have foreseen. Also, would also refer cases based its ruling on facts and evidence parties had been given reasonable opportunity comment. Surprise judgments are prohibited they conflict with postulates fair trial. According law European Court Human Rights, each must comment all relevant aspects case, respect evidence, but issues, i.e. participate effectively proceedings. It emphasised this refers arguments raised ex officio by court. The principle iura novit curia cannot excuse for allowing debate concerning issues. However, say declare positions parties. This duty exists exception; instance, order inform intention deviate or announced expressly implicitly, legally intricate involving issues no law. point reasoning foreseeable view during course proceedings opposing itself. Certainly, civil expected display due diligence him/herself regard. If foreseen party, it judgment. pursued regarded substantially different observations submitted proceedings, there breach adversarial principle. These trial courts, ones, prohibition bears special significance context courts considering their immediate effect rendering matter res iudicata. Supreme means allow second appeal against judgment, fail provide remedy invariably provided Constitutional Rights.