The question of the identity of the claim is one of the most controversial theoretical issues in civil procedural law, with far-reaching practical consequences. The aim of this Master's thesis is to present the three main theories that determine the identity of the claim (civil, pure procedural and equivalence theory) and the four procedural institutes where they are (most) relevant: lis pendens, cumulative claims, modification of the claim and res judicata. In the context of cumulative claims, the theories of claim identity help us determine whether there are multiple claims or a single one; in lis pendens, they help asses whether proceedings concerning the same claim are already pending between the same parties; in modification of the claim, the question is whether the identity of the claim has changed; and in res judicata, whether a final judgment has already been rendered on the same claim. Each of the four chapters at the body of this work first introduces one of the institutes and the theoretical problem of the identity of the claim related to it. This is followed by an overview of the relevant case law, focusing on the most crucial issues faced by the courts in applying each theory. The aim of the thesis is to analyse which of the theories is the most applicable to each of the institutes and to examine whether the practice is consistent and established. In addition, the question often arises whether the courts correctly understand and distinguish among the three elements of the claim: the subject matter, the cause of action and the legal basis of the claim.
|
