Unification of claims in the Civil Procedure Code

Y counting the topic of unifying lawsuits in the Civil Procedure Law is one of the important topics that influences the practical aspect in the courts, and there must be. A The connection between the two claims to be unified is of great importance for the application of the defense of unifying the two claims, and that The Iraqi legislator did not define the relationship, but there are legislations that defined it, such as the Lebanese legislation, which defined it as follows: "The solution decided for one of them is." It would affect the solution that must be decided for the other.” h Likewise: "A relationship between two lawsuits pending before two different courts, which makes it necessary for the proper administration of justice to unify and adjudicate them." In the field of jurisprudence, the concept of unification of legal claims has been introduced. It has been stated that there is a close connection between two claims or lawsuits, which makes it beneficial to hear and adjudicate them in a single court. This is done to avoid conflicting rulings, which may be difficult or impossible to reconcile if each claim is heard and adjudicated by separate courts. and that Some scholars of jurisprudence believe that the aforementioned concept is closer to the impermissibility of division, which restricts the cases of connection. and They assert that the legislator did not only intend to consolidate lawsuits to avoid non-enforcement of judgments, but also to ensure efficient judicial proceedings and save time and effort. Consolidating lawsuits facilitates their resolution in a short time and at a low cost. Some have defined this concept in other ways. "There is a close connection between the two parties, and this encourages bringing them together before one court to investigate and adjudicate their cases collectively, with the aim of avoiding conflicting rulings between them and ensuring justice." and that The above definitions may be consistent with some referral-by-joinder laws, such as Egyptian law, but they are inconsistent with Iraqi law, which stipulates consolidation by joining. Iraqi law requires that the two lawsuits be combined into a single lawsuit before a single court, while the legal texts that allow referral by joining are satisfied with combining the two lawsuits before a single court without consolidating them. Therefore, the Iraqi judiciary issues its rulings by consolidation, not by referral. The concept is defined "Connexion "is defined as a close connection between two claims that it is deemed appropriate and conducive to the proper administration of justice to consolidate and adjudicate together before a single court. The concept of connection arises when there is a relationship between claims, such that the judgment issued in one claim has an impact on the adjudication of the other claim. According to Iraqi jurisprudence, connection exists if there is one or more common elements between the claims, such as the unity of the subject matter, cause, or persons involved. In addition, the Baghdad Court of Appeal went further by requiring unity of subject matter, cause, and parties involved to achieve unity between the two claims. And issue the appropriate decision to avoid contradiction between the two decisions.