Projet de loi modifiant le Code civil et le Code judiciaire en vue de simplifier les règles qui gouvernent le procès civil.
General information ¶
- Author
- LE Christian Brotcorne
- Submission date
- Aug. 9, 2010
- Official page
- Visit
- Status
- Adopted
- Requirement
- Simple
- Subjects
- civil procedure
Voting ¶
- Voted to adopt
- Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP Open Vld MR
- Abstained from voting
- N-VA VB
Party dissidents ¶
- Sarah Smeyers (N-VA) voted to adopt.
- Peter Luykx (CD&V) abstained from voting.
Contact form ¶
Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.
Discussion ¶
June 21, 2012 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)
Full source
President André Flahaut ⚙
Mrs Van Vaerenbergh and Mr. Terwingen, the rapporteurs, refer to their written report.
Sarah Smeyers N-VA ⚙
Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit a very short vote statement. We will abstain from this bill because we believe – the cabinet of Mrs. the minister has already admitted it itself – that there are still fundamental concerns to be made with this bill, which could have been solved with a few extra hours of committee meeting. The proposal could have been improved through amendments.
The N-VA was in favour of holding hearings, or even of obtaining written opinions from the griffies, or from CENEGER. Even that was refused because everything had to go quickly. We do not agree with this method; we want to make good legislation. The principle of the proposal is not bad, but the future will show that the evaluation will require some repair work. Therefore, the N-VA will abstain.
Christian Brotcorne LE ⚙
As the author of the proposal, I would like to react. I expected that this text could be voted unanimously. As it is very technical, I will not go into the details.
These advances are expected in the judiciary sector since the Justice Dialogues that date back several years. Making new requests did not make much sense, since it meets a need expressed by all the field actors. We do not have to work in precipitation. Furthermore, the point of this proposal that could cause a difficulty has been removed, so I do not see what problem there could be to vote serenely on this text just recently.