Portée du principe de la représentation obligatoire par avocat devant la Cour Commune de Justice et d’arbitrage (CCJA) à l’aune de la pratique jurisprudentielle

The law of the Organization for the Harmonization of Business Law in Africa (OHADA) enshrines the principle of compulsory representation by lawyer before its High Court, the Common Court of Justice and Arbitration (CCJA). It follows from this principle that any appeal before the CCJA and any related...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Recht in Afrika
Main Author: Jules Masuku Ayikaba
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:German
English
French
Published: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG 2023
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.5771/2363-6270-2023-1-55
https://doaj.org/article/6c4ad88d23a4460abdc607810340bb34
id ftdoajarticles:oai:doaj.org/article:6c4ad88d23a4460abdc607810340bb34
record_format openpolar
spelling ftdoajarticles:oai:doaj.org/article:6c4ad88d23a4460abdc607810340bb34 2023-08-27T04:06:14+02:00 Portée du principe de la représentation obligatoire par avocat devant la Cour Commune de Justice et d’arbitrage (CCJA) à l’aune de la pratique jurisprudentielle Jules Masuku Ayikaba 2023-07-01T00:00:00Z https://doi.org/10.5771/2363-6270-2023-1-55 https://doaj.org/article/6c4ad88d23a4460abdc607810340bb34 DE EN FR ger eng fre Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG https://www.nomos-elibrary.de/10.5771/2363-6270-2023-1-55 https://doaj.org/toc/2363-6270 2363-6270 doi:10.5771/2363-6270-2023-1-55 https://doaj.org/article/6c4ad88d23a4460abdc607810340bb34 Recht in Afrika, Vol 26, Iss 1, Pp 55-69 (2023) Asia and Eurasia Africa Pacific Area and Antarctica KL-KWX article 2023 ftdoajarticles https://doi.org/10.5771/2363-6270-2023-1-55 2023-08-06T00:42:09Z The law of the Organization for the Harmonization of Business Law in Africa (OHADA) enshrines the principle of compulsory representation by lawyer before its High Court, the Common Court of Justice and Arbitration (CCJA). It follows from this principle that any appeal before the CCJA and any related procedural document such as the reply or replication, not signed by a lawyer belonging to a Bar in the OHADA geographical area, are to be declared inadmissible. Notwithstanding the explicit consecration of this principle in OHADA law, the CCJA has been called upon on many occasions to define its contour. This paper examines the interpretation of this principle by this court. It first notes the scope of this principle as defined by the CCJA in relation to the criteria retained for the exercise of the ministry of counsel before its jurisdiction. Finally, it dwells on its jurisprudence concerning the form and statements of the special mandate to be given to the lawyer, on the one hand, and on the legal consequences attached to it, on the other hand. It concludes by pointing out that OHADA law, and the High Court in its jurisprudential practice, are more flexible and better adapted to the obligation of representation by a lawyer than the law of certain OHADA member states. Article in Journal/Newspaper Antarc* Antarctica Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles Pacific Recht in Afrika 26 1 55 69
institution Open Polar
collection Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles
op_collection_id ftdoajarticles
language German
English
French
topic Asia and Eurasia
Africa
Pacific Area
and Antarctica
KL-KWX
spellingShingle Asia and Eurasia
Africa
Pacific Area
and Antarctica
KL-KWX
Jules Masuku Ayikaba
Portée du principe de la représentation obligatoire par avocat devant la Cour Commune de Justice et d’arbitrage (CCJA) à l’aune de la pratique jurisprudentielle
topic_facet Asia and Eurasia
Africa
Pacific Area
and Antarctica
KL-KWX
description The law of the Organization for the Harmonization of Business Law in Africa (OHADA) enshrines the principle of compulsory representation by lawyer before its High Court, the Common Court of Justice and Arbitration (CCJA). It follows from this principle that any appeal before the CCJA and any related procedural document such as the reply or replication, not signed by a lawyer belonging to a Bar in the OHADA geographical area, are to be declared inadmissible. Notwithstanding the explicit consecration of this principle in OHADA law, the CCJA has been called upon on many occasions to define its contour. This paper examines the interpretation of this principle by this court. It first notes the scope of this principle as defined by the CCJA in relation to the criteria retained for the exercise of the ministry of counsel before its jurisdiction. Finally, it dwells on its jurisprudence concerning the form and statements of the special mandate to be given to the lawyer, on the one hand, and on the legal consequences attached to it, on the other hand. It concludes by pointing out that OHADA law, and the High Court in its jurisprudential practice, are more flexible and better adapted to the obligation of representation by a lawyer than the law of certain OHADA member states.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Jules Masuku Ayikaba
author_facet Jules Masuku Ayikaba
author_sort Jules Masuku Ayikaba
title Portée du principe de la représentation obligatoire par avocat devant la Cour Commune de Justice et d’arbitrage (CCJA) à l’aune de la pratique jurisprudentielle
title_short Portée du principe de la représentation obligatoire par avocat devant la Cour Commune de Justice et d’arbitrage (CCJA) à l’aune de la pratique jurisprudentielle
title_full Portée du principe de la représentation obligatoire par avocat devant la Cour Commune de Justice et d’arbitrage (CCJA) à l’aune de la pratique jurisprudentielle
title_fullStr Portée du principe de la représentation obligatoire par avocat devant la Cour Commune de Justice et d’arbitrage (CCJA) à l’aune de la pratique jurisprudentielle
title_full_unstemmed Portée du principe de la représentation obligatoire par avocat devant la Cour Commune de Justice et d’arbitrage (CCJA) à l’aune de la pratique jurisprudentielle
title_sort portée du principe de la représentation obligatoire par avocat devant la cour commune de justice et d’arbitrage (ccja) à l’aune de la pratique jurisprudentielle
publisher Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG
publishDate 2023
url https://doi.org/10.5771/2363-6270-2023-1-55
https://doaj.org/article/6c4ad88d23a4460abdc607810340bb34
geographic Pacific
geographic_facet Pacific
genre Antarc*
Antarctica
genre_facet Antarc*
Antarctica
op_source Recht in Afrika, Vol 26, Iss 1, Pp 55-69 (2023)
op_relation https://www.nomos-elibrary.de/10.5771/2363-6270-2023-1-55
https://doaj.org/toc/2363-6270
2363-6270
doi:10.5771/2363-6270-2023-1-55
https://doaj.org/article/6c4ad88d23a4460abdc607810340bb34
op_doi https://doi.org/10.5771/2363-6270-2023-1-55
container_title Recht in Afrika
container_volume 26
container_issue 1
container_start_page 55
op_container_end_page 69
_version_ 1775347037049454592