THE Government Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of Andalusia, Ceuta and Melilla agreed at the meeting held today raise an urgent consultation at the General Council of the Judicial Power on the constitution of the House which will dictate new judgment in the case of the specific ERE procedure after the decision of the Constitutional Court. The government room asks whether the situation of voluntary leave of one of the judges excludes the authorization to act granted to be part of the chamber.
He The specific ERE procedure was judged by three magistrates of the First Section. He president and the speaker of the sentence is in retirement situation, Another judge continues at the Seville court and the third judge requested his transfer to the Alicante provincial court.
Following the judgment of the Constitutional Court, the president of the Superior Court of Justice of Andalusia, Lorenzo del Rioagreed on July 8 that, given the impossibility of the speaker, the case would be decided by the two other judges present at the hearing.
For that, The judge assigned to the Court of Alicante was authorized to be part of the court of the first section of the Provincial Court of Seville who must render the new judgment.
But the president of the Alicante provincial court sent a letter, dated October 3, in which he declared that the judge He has been on voluntary leave from his judicial career since July 22.
It is for this reason that the Government Chamber we now agree to launch an urgent consultatione to the General Council of the Judicial Power to find out if this situation of voluntary leave excludes the authorization already granted or, on the contrary, must be part of the court under the application of article 194 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Concretely, the Chamber of Government indicates that “it is agreed to submit an urgent consultation to the General Council of the Judicial Power in the sense of knowing whether this circumstance does not exclude the authorization and authorization of action already granted to integrate the court or, on the contrary, is applicable to said magistrate the exception established in article 194.2.3ª, in relation to the general rule of 194.1, all from the Code of Civil Procedure referring to “Judges and Magistrates responsible for ruling on business.”
He article 194 2.3. establishes that magistrates who have accessed a public function or a profession incompatible with the exercise of the judicial function or who have taken voluntary leave to run as candidates for positions elected by popular vote are exempt from being part of the court.
