The judges from the High Court of Cassation and Justice appreciated (in the Decision no. 508 of February the 3rd 2011 rendered on appeal by the Commercial Section of the HCCJ having as object claims) that the provisions of article 156, paragraph (1) of the Civil Procedure Code do not imperatively state that the deferment of a cause due to lack of defense is mandatory, because there is the possibility of granting only one other hearing date and only when the claim has grounds. In this concrete case, the High Court appreciated that, the claim for deferring a hearing date due to the impossibility of the defender being in court due to health reasons and adverse weather conditions was rightfully dismissed, because at a previous term the defendant made a similar request, stating the same reasons, which was granted by the court. Also, the High Court showed that, in this case, the appellant was not wronged nor was her right to a defense restricted, because article 156, paragraph (2) from the Civil Procedure Code was applied, which states that when a court refuses a request for deferring a hearing due to lac of council, the sentencing will be delayed in regard of the filling of written conclusions.
>> The source