| Abstract [eng] |
Application of Restoration Claim Limitation Period Basics in the Lithuanian Court Practice This master’s thesis analyses the application of claim limitation period basics in Lithuanian court practice. The analysis features court practice from December 2002 to March 2012. The paper starts with the definition of claim limitation period and restoration of the claim limitation period and a short overview of the reasons for the appearance of the two legal concepts. The paper proceeds with an analysis of the purposes of restoring the claim limitation period. The analysis involves a study of the contradictions between the values defended by the claim limitation period and the values defended by the restoration of the claim limitation period. The second part of the paper is dedicated to a description of changing court practice in the accentuation of the criteria for restoring the claim limitation period. Special attention is paid to distinguish objective and subjective criteria and to the importance of this differentiation and its benefits in dispute settlement. The third part of the paper contains a classification of the basics for restoring the claim limitation period. At first, the analysis features cases in which the claim limitation period expired because the plaintiff attempted to settle the dispute extra-judicially, although pre-trial consideration does not exempt the relevant party from the duty to defend infringed rights by the set deadline; the analysis therefore focuses on instances where restoration of the claim limitation period was possible. The analysis proceeds with consideration of the relation of the expiration of the claim limitation period with the restoration of the claim limitation period. The importance of restoring the claim limitation period when the claim limitation period has not expired is also revealed. The analysis culminates with a study of the basics for restoring the claim limitation period with regard to the plaintiff. Issues connected with legal entities, individuals, and prosecutors requesting the restoration of the claim limitation period are considered. The objective criteria of restoring the claim limitation period are revealed by analysing cases in which prosecutors defended the public interest in relationships connected with the following: restoration of the right of ownership; preservation of protected areas and architectural, cultural, and historic valuables; and relationships connected with area planning. The purposes of restoring the claim limitation period and its objective criteria were revealed by the study of the following cases: court disputes between employees and employers, defence of health as a universally protected value, and the protection of the rights of children. The final section of the paper is dedicated to the procedural aspects of the claim limitation period. The study involves the right of courts to settle the issue of restoration of the claim limitation period ex officio in the absence of a plaintiff’s request to restore an expired claim limitation period. |
