Intervention in Reservations

Abstract

By studying the subject of interference in the reservation, we saw that it is not permissible to enumerate the implementation procedures on the same money. This rule that they express in jurisprudence (that reservation does not respond to the reservation) has not only its benefits to the debtor and its creditors, by providing expenses, time and effort. Rather, it goes beyond this to contribute in one way or another to reducing the procedures required by the law to sign the reservation. And he provides him with the seized things to make them inventory and then booked them for the benefit of all the detainees. This result is reflected in two types of the first procedures: which is the lack of appointment of another guard to the reservations with the presence of the first guard. The second: Conduct one sale in favor of all the barriers. And providing time and procedures we touched more in the seizure of the price under the hand of the record, because the legislator in the text of Article (432) pleadings is easy to interfere in two things: 1. It is permissible to intervene after the sale of reservations, by subscribing to the creditor who interferes in the price. 2. The reservation on the price without the need to request the ruling on the validity of the reservation. The unification of the reservation procedures in the event of multiple reservations, even indirectly contributes to addressing the problem of slowing the procedures of litigation before the courts, which is the complexity of the procedures is one of the most important reasons.