The Dignity of Marriage

"Chapter I
Judicial power in generaland tribunals....
"Art. 27 – § 1. The Roman Rota is an appeal tribunal of second instance concurrent with the tribunals mentioned in art. 25; therefore all causes judged in first instance at any tribunal whatsoever can be brought to the Roman Rota by legitimate appeal (cf. can. 1444, § 1, n. 1; Pastor bonus, art. 128, n. 1).
§ 2. Without prejudice to particular laws issued by the Apostolic See or indults granted by it, the Roman Rota is the only tribunal of third and higher instance (cf. can. 1444, § 1, n. 2; Pastor bonus, art. 128, n. 2).
Art. 28 – Apart from a legitimate appeal to the Roman Rota in accordance with art. 27, a referral of a cause (provocatio) made to the Apostolic See does not suspend the exercise of jurisdiction by a judge who has already begun to hear that cause; therefore he can continue the trial through to the definitive sentence, unless the Apostolic See has notified the judge that it has called the cause to itself (cf. can. 1417 § 2).....
Chapter II
The ministers of the tribunal....
Art. 35 – § 1. All who make up the tribunal or assist it must take an oath to carry out their function properly and faithfully (can. 1454).
§ 2. In order to exercise their respective functions properly, judges, defenders of the bond and promoters of justice are to be diligent in continuing to deepen their knowledge of matrimonial and procedural law.
§ 3. With particular reason it is necessary that they study the jurisprudence of the Roman Rota, since it is responsible to promote the unity of jurisprudence and, through its own sentences, to be of assistance to lower tribunals (cf. Pastor bonus, art.126)....
Art. 56 – § 1. In causes of the nullity of marriage the presence of the defender of the bond is always required.
§ 2. The defender must participate from the beginning of the process and during its course, in accordance with the law.
§ 3. In every grade of trial, the defender is bound by the obligation to propose any kind of proofs, responses and exceptions that, without prejudice to the truth of the matter, contribute to the protection of the bond (cf. can. 1432).
§ 4. In causes concerning the incapacities described in can. 1095, it pertains to the defender to see whether the questions proposed in a clear fashion to the expert are relevant to the matter and do not go beyond the limits of the expert's competence; it pertains to the defender to observe whether the expert opinions are rooted in a Christian anthropology and have been drawn up according to a scientific method, pointing out to the judge anything he has found in the reports that is to be advanced in favour of the bond; in case of an affirmative sentence, before the tribunal of appeal it pertains to the defender to indicate clearly if anything in the expert reports was not correctly evaluated by the judges to the detriment of the bond.
§ 5. The defender can never act in favour of the nullity of marriage; if in a special case he has nothing that can be reasonably proposed or argued in favour of the bond, the defender can remit himself to the justice of the court.
§ 6. At the appellate level, after having carefully considered all the acts, even though the defender can refer back to the observations in favour of the bond proposed in the prior instance, he nonetheless must always propose his own observations, especially in regard to a supplementary instruction, if one has been carried out....

"....Chapter I
The judicial examination....
Art. 172 – If the person to be questioned uses a language unknown to the judge, a sworn interpreter designated by the judge is to be employed. The declarations are still to be written down in the original language and the translation added. An interpreter is also to be used if a person with a speech or hearing impairment must be questioned, unless the judge should prefer that the questions which he proposes be answered in writing (cf. can. 1471)....
Chapter II
Specific proofs
1. The declarations of the parties....
4. Experts
Art. 203 – § 1. In causes concerning impotence or a defect of consent because of a mentis morbum or because of the incapacities described in can. 1095, the judge is to employ the assitance of one or more experts, unless from the circumstances this would appear evidently useless (cf. can. 1680)(24).
§ 2. In other causes the assistance of experts is to be employed whenever, according to the prescription of the judge, their study and expert opinion, based on the precepts of their art or science, are required in order to establish some fact or to ascertain the true nature of something, as when an investigation of the authenticity of some written document is to be made (cf. cann. 1574; 1680).
Art. 204 – § 1. It pertains to the praeses or the ponens to appoint experts and, as the case may be, to accept reports already made by other experts (cf. can. 1575).
§ 2. The appointment of an expert is to be communicated to the parties and the defender of the bond, without prejudice to art. 164.
Art. 205 – § 1. For the role of expert there are to be chosen those who not only have obtained a testimonial of their suitability, but are outstanding for their knowledge and experience of their art, and commended for their religiosity and honesty.
§ 2. In order that the assistance of experts in causes concerning the incapacities mentioned in can. 1095 may be truly useful, special care is to be taken that experts are chosen who adhere to the principles of Christian anthropology.
Art. 206 – Experts can be excluded or exception can be taken to them for the same reasons as witnesses (cf. can. 1576).
Art. 207 – § 1. The judge, taking into account those things which might have been brought forward by the parties or the defender of the bond, is to define by his decree the individual points about which the assistance of the expert is to be concerned (cf. can. 1577, § 1).
§ 2. The expert is to be given the acts of the cause and other documents and aids which he could need in order to carry out his task properly and faithfully (can. 1577, § 2).
§ 3. The judge, having heard the expert himself, is to set the time period within which the examination is to be carried out and the report presented, taking care, however, that the cause not suffer useless delays (cf. can. 1577, § 3).
Art. 208 – In causes of impotence the judge is to ask of the expert the nature of the impotence and whether it is absolute or relative, antecedant or subsequent, perpetual or temporary, and, if curable, by what means.
Art. 209 – § 1. In causes of incapacity, according to the understanding of can. 1095, the judge is not to omit asking the expert whether one or both parties suffered from a particular habitual or transitory anomaly at the time of the wedding; what was its seriousness; and when, from what cause and in what circumstances it originated and manifested itself.
§ 2. Specifically:
1o in causes of defectus usus rationis, he is to ask whether the anomaly seriously disturbed the use of reason at the time of the celebration of the marriage; and with what intensity and by what symptoms it manifested itself;
2o in causes of defectus discretionis iudicii, he is to ask what was the effect of the anomaly on the critical and elective faculty for making serious decisions, particularly in freely choosing a state in life;
3o finally, in causes of incapacity to assume the essential obligations of marriage, he is to ask what was the nature and gravity of the psychic cause on account of which the party would labour not only under a serious difficulty but even the impossibility of sustaining the actions inherent in the obligations of marriage.
§ 3. The expert in his opinion is to respond to the individual points defined in the decree of the judge according to the precepts of his own art and science; he is to take care lest he exceed the limits of his task by giving forth judgements which pertain to the judge (cf. cann. 1577, § 1; 1574).
Art. 210 – § 1. Each individual expert is to prepare his own report distinct from the others, unless the judge orders that one report be signed by all the experts; if this is done, then differences of opinion, should there be any, are to be carefully noted (can. 1578, § 1).
§ 2. The experts must indicate clearly by which documents or other suitable means they verified the identity of the persons or things; by what path and method they proceeded to carry out the task entrusted to them; and, most especially, which arguments form the basis for the conclusions reached in the report and what degree of certainty those conclusions enjoy (cf. can. 1578, § 2).
Art. 211 – The expert can be called by the judge in order to confirm his conclusions and to supply further explanations which seem necessary (cf. can. 1578, § 3).
Art. 212 – § 1. The judge is to weigh carefully not only the conclusions of the experts, even if they are in agreement, but also the other circumstances of the cause (can. 1579, § 1).
§ 2. When he gives the reasons for his decision, he must express by which arguments he was moved to accept or reject the conclusions of the experts (can. 1579, § 2).
Art. 213 – § 1. The parties can designate private experts to be approved by the judge (can. 1581, § 1).
§ 2. These experts, if the judge so admits, can examine the acts of the cause, if need be, and be present at the carrying out of the expert examination; moreover they can always exhibit their own report (cf. can. 1581, § 2).
5. Presumptions
Art. 214 – A presumption is a probable conjecture about an uncertain matter; one kind is a presumption of law (iuris), which is established by the law itself, the other is a presumption of an individual (hominis), which is made by the judge (can. 1584).
Art. 215 – One who has a presumption of law in his favour is freed from the burden of proof, which falls on the other party (cf. can. 1585).
Art. 216 – § 1. The judge is not to make presumptions, which are not established by law, unless from a certain and determined fact, which is directly connected with the object of the controversy (can. 1586).
§ 2. Likewise the judge is not to make presumptions which are contrary to those developed in the jurisprudence of the Roman Rota....

Chapter I
A complaint of nullity against the sentence
Art. 269 – If the tribunal of appeal sees that the oral contentious process was employed in the lower grade of trial, it is to declare the nullity of the sentence and remit the cause to the tribunal which issued the sentence (cf. can. 1669).
Art. 270 – In accordance with can. 1620, a sentence is affected by the defect of irremediable nullity if:
1o it was issued by a judge who was absolutely incompetent;
2o it was issued by one who lacked the power of judging in the tribunal which issued the sentence;
3o the judge issued the sentence impelled by force or grave fear;
4o the trial was carried out without the judicial petition mentioned in art. 114, or was not instituted against any respondent party;
5o it was issued between parties, at least one of whom lacked personal standing in the trial;
6o someone acted in the name of another without a legitimate mandate;
7o the right of defense was denied to one or both of the parties;
8o the controversy was not decided even in part.
Art. 271 – A complaint of the nullity described in art. 270 can be proposed in perpetuity by way of an exception, but by way of an action it can be proposed within ten years from the day of the publication of the sentence (cf. can. 1621).
Art. 272 – A sentence is affected by the defect of remediable nullity only if:
1o it is issued by an illegitimate number of judges, contrary to the rule of art. 30;
2o it does not contain the motives, that is, the reasons for which the decision was made;
3o it lacks the signatures required by law;
4o it does not bear the indication of the day, month, year and place in which it was issued;
5o it is based on a null judicial act, whose nullity has not been sanated;
6o it is issued against a party who was legitimately absent in accordance with art. 139, § 2 (cf. can. 1622).
Art. 273 – A complaint of nullity in the cases mentioned in art. 272 can be proposed within three months from the notice of the publication of the sentence; once this term has elapsed the sentence is considered to have been sanated ipso iure (cf. can. 1623).
Art. 274 – § 1. The judge who issued a sentence is to hear the complaint of nullity proposed by way of an action; but if the party fears that the judge, who issued the sentence being challenged by a complaint of nullity, is overly concerned about the matter, and thus considers him suspect, he can demand that another judge be appointed in his place, in accordance with art. 69, § 1 (cf. can. 1624).
§ 2. If the complaint of nullity concerns sentences issued in two or more grades of trial, the judge who issued the last sentence is to hear the matter.
§ 3. A complaint of nullity can also be proposed together with an appeal, within the time limit established for appealing, or together with a petition for an new examination of the same cause, mentioned in art. 290 (cf. can. 1625).
Art. 275 – The judge before whom a cause is pending is to hear a complaint of nullity proposed by way of an exception or ex officio in accordance with art. 77, § 1.
Art. 276 – § 1. Not only the parties who consider themselves aggrieved can propose a complaint of nullity, but also the defender of the bond and the promoter of justice, whenever he had taken part in the cause or is taking part in it by virtue of a decree of the judge (cf. can. 1626, § 1).
§ 2. The judge himself can retract or amend a sentence issued by himself, within the time limit for acting set by art. 273, unless in the meantime an appeal together with a complaint of nullity has been filed or the nullity of the sentence has been sanated by the passage of the time limit mentioned in art. 273 (cf. can. 1626, § 2).
Art. 277 – § 1. Causes of complaint of nullity proposed by way of an action can be handled following the rules for the oral contentious process, while causes of complaint of nullity proposed by way of an exception or ex officio in accordance with art. 77, § 1 are to be handled according to artt. 217-225 and 227 concerning incidental causes (cf. can. 1627).
§ 2. It pertains, however, to a collegial tribunal to hear the nullity of a decision issued by a collegial tribunal.
§ 3. Appeal is possible from a decision concerning a complaint of nullity.
Art. 278 – If a sentence has been declared null by the tribunal of appeal, the cause is remitted to the tribunal a quo so that it may proceed in accordance with the law.
Chapter II
The appeal
Art. 279 – § 1. A party who considers himself aggrieved by a sentence, the defender of the bond, and likewise the promoter of justice if he had taken part in the trial, have the right to appeal from the sentence to the higher judge, without prejudice to the requirement of art. 280 (cf. can. 1628).
§ 2. Without prejudice to the requirement of art. 264, the defender of the bond is bound by office to appeal, if he considers the sentence which first declared the nullity of the marriage to be insufficiently founded.
Art. 280 – § 1. There is no appeal given:
1o from a sentence of the Supreme Pontiff himself or of the Apostolic Signatura;
2o from a sentence affected by the defect of nullity, unless it is filed together with a complaint of nullity, in accordance with art. 274, § 3;
3o from a sentence which has passed into res iudicata;
4o from a decree of the judge or from an interlocutory sentence which do not have the force of a definitive sentence, unless it is filed together with an appeal from a definitive sentence;
5o from a sentence or from a decree in a cause which the law provides is to be decided expeditissime (can. 1629).
§ 2. The prescription given in § 1, n. 3, does not concern a sentence by which the principal cause of nullity of marriage has been decided (cf. can. 1643).
Art. 281 – § 1. An appeal must be filed before the judge by whom (a quo) the sentence was issued, within the peremptory time limit of fifteen canonical days from notice of the publication of the sentence (can. 1630, § 1).
§ 2. It is sufficient that the appellant party signify to the judge a quo that he is filing an appeal.
§ 3. If this is done orally, the notary is to consign this to writing in the presence of the appellant himself (can. 1630, § 2).
§ 4. But if the appeal is filed when only the dispositive part of the sentence has been made known to the parties before the sentence is published, in accordance with art. 257, § 1, then art. 285, § 1 is to be observed.
Art. 282 – If a question arises concerning the legitimacy of the appeal, the tribunal of appeal is to hear it expeditissime following the rules for the oral contentious process (cf. can. 1631).
Art. 283 – § 1. If it is not indicated in the appeal to which tribunal it is directed, it is presumed to have been made to the tribunal of appeal mentioned in art. 25 (cf. can. 1632, § 1).
§ 2. If one party appeals to the Roman Rota but the other party to another tribunal of appeal, the Roman Rota is to hear the cause, without prejudice to art. 18 (cf. can. 1632, § 2).
§ 3. When an appeal to the Roman Rota has been filed, the tribunal a quo must send the acts to it. But if the acts already have been sent to the other tribunal of appeal, the tribunal a quo is to inform it immediately of the matter, lest it begin to treat the cause, and so that it sends the acts to the Roman Rota.
§ 4. However, before the time limits set by the law have expired, no tribunal of appeal can make a cause its own, lest the parties be deprived of their right of appealing to the Roman Rota.
Art. 284 – § 1. An appeal is to be pursued before the judge to whom (ad quem) it has been directed within a month of its filing, unless the judge a quo has granted the party a longer time for pursuing it (can. 1633).
§ 2. The appellant can call upon the assistance of the tribunal a quo to send to the tribunal ad quod the act pursuing the appeal.
Art. 285 – § 1. In order to pursue a appeal, it is required and it is sufficient that the party calls upon the assistance of the higher judge to emend the challenged decision, attaching a copy of this sentence and indicating the reasons for the appeal (can. 1634, § 1).
§ 2. But if the party cannot obtain a copy of the challenged sentence within the canonical time period, the time limits do not run in the meantime and the obstacle is to be made known to the appellate judge, who is to oblige the judge a quo to carry out his duty as soon as possible (can. 1634, § 2).
§ 3. Meanwhile the judge a quo must send the acts in accordance with art. 90 to the appellate judge (cf. can. 1634, § 3).
Art. 286 – When the time limits concerning appeals, before both the judge a quo and the judge ad quem, have expired without any action, the appeal is considered to have been abandoned (can. 1635).
Art. 287 – The appellant can renounce the appeal, with the effects described in art. 151 (cf. can. 1636).
Art. 288 – § 1. An appeal filed by the petitioning party benefits the respondent party as well, and vice versa (cf. can. 1637, § 1).
§ 2. If an appeal is filed by one party regarding one ground of the sentence, the other party, even if the time limits for the appeal have expired, can appeal incidentally concerning other grounds of nullity within the peremptory time limit of fifteen days from the day when the principal appeal had been communicated to him (cf. can. 1637, § 3).
§ 3. Unless it is otherwise evident, an appeal is presumed to be made against all the grounds of a sentence (can. 1637, § 4).
Art. 289 – § 1. Causes of the nullity of marriage never become res iudicata (cf. can. 1643).
§ 2. However, a matrimonial cause which has been judged by one tribunal can never be judged again by the same or another tribunal of the same grade, without prejudice to art. 9, § 2.
§ 3. This provision applies only if it is a matter of the same cause, that is, concerning the same marriage and the same ground of nullity.
Chapter III
A petition for a new examination of the same cause after two conforming decisions
Art. 290 – § 1. If a double conforming sentence in a cause of the nullity of marriage has been passed, there is no possibility for an appeal, but the sentence can be challenged at any time before a tribunal of third or higher instance, as long as new and grave proofs or arguments have been brought forward within the peremptory time limit of thirty days from the time the challenge was proposed (cf. can. 1644, § 1).
§ 2. This provision is to be followed also if a sentence which declared the nullity of marriage has been confirmed not by another sentence but by decree (cf. can. 1684, § 2).
Art. 291 – § 1. Two sentences or decisions are said to be formally conforming if they have been issued between the same parties, concerning the nullity of the same marriage, and on the basis of the same ground of nullity and the same reasoning of law and of fact (cf. can. 1641, n. 1).
§ 2. Decisions are considered to be equivalently or substantially conforming when, even though they specify and determine the ground of nullity by different names, they are still rooted in the same facts rendering the marriage null and the same proofs.
§ 3. Without prejudice to art. 136 and without prejudice to the right of defense, the tribunal of appeal which issued the second decision is to decide about the equivalent or substantial conformity, or else a higher tribunal.
Art. 292 – § 1. It is not required that the new arguments or proofs, mentioned in art. 290, § 1, be most grave, much less that they be decisive, that is, those which peremptorily demand a contrary decision, but it is enough that they render this probable.
§ 2. However mere objections or critical observations about the sentence are not sufficient.
Art. 293 – § 1. Within a month of the exhibition of the new proofs and arguments, the tribunal of appeal, having heard the defender of the bond and having informed the other party, must decide by decree whether the new proposition of the cause must be admitted or not (cf. can. 1644, § 1).
§ 2. If the new proposition of the cause is admitted, the tribunal is to proceed in accordance with art. 267.
Art. 294 – A petition for obtaining a new proposition of the cause does not suspend the execution of a double conforming decision, unless the tribunal of appeal, holding that the petition is probably founded and that irreparable damage could arise from the execution, orders the suspension (cf. can. 1644, § 2)....

.

"Art. 300 – § 1. As soon as a sentence in favour of the nullity of marriage has been made executable in accordance with art. 301, the Judicial Vicar is to communicate it to the Ordinary of the place in which the marriage was celebrated. The Ordinary, however, must see that mention of the declaration of the nullity of the marriage and of any vetita that may have been imposed is made in the marriage and baptismal registers (cf. can. 1685).
§ 2. But if the Ordinary has it for certain that the decision is null, he is to remit the matter to the tribunal, without prejudice to art. 274, § 2, and with the parties having been informed (cf. can. 1654, § 2).
Art. 301 – § 1. After a sentence which has first declared the nullity of marriage has been confirmed in a grade of appeal either by sentence or by decree, those whose marriage has been declared null can contract new marriages as soon as the decree or the second sentence has been communicated to them, unless this has been prohibited by a vetitum added to the sentence or decree itself or imposed by the Ordinary of the place, without prejudice to art. 294 (cf. can. 1684, § 1).
§ 2. The same is the case after a marriage has been declared null in a documentary process by a sentence which has not been appealed.
§ 3. However, those things which must precede the celebration of marriage in accordance with can. 1066-1071 are to be observed."