THE UNNOMINATED PRECAUTIONARY MEASURE, BUDGET OF AN ADEQUATE EFFECTIVE JURISDICTIONAL PROTECTION IN THE CIVIL PROCESS

Abstract

The unnamed precautionary measure comes to fill, to a large extent, the absence of full guarantee in the judicial process, specifically in civil litigation, when once the precautionary measures to be decreed and practiced were constituted in their essence by the named precautionary measure, which Theirs greatly limited the actions of the procedural subjects in order to anticipate the satisfaction or fulfillment of the future ruling to be pronounced satisfactory to the plaintiff’s claims, regardless of whether it was a declaratory, executive, liquidation or arbitration process. In addition to the foregoing, the precaution named in stricto sensu is only established as a guarantee of anticipated effectiveness of the future ruling to be handed down, not being, therefore, an ideal mechanism for the current protection of the right in litigation or of the people who intervene in the contentious as long as the different stages of the process are completed, which results in a state of lack of state protection as long as the judgment of merit has not been pronounced or, if applicable, the arbitration award.
 
With the advent of the unnamed injunction in the civil procedural statute (CGP), of its own in other procedural systems, thus, the Code of Administrative Procedure and Administrative Litigation (CPACA), the defendant is guaranteed not only the anticipated effectiveness of the future substantive decision that is made, in addition, that while the judicial action lasts, the people involved as subjects of the litigation will be protected, as well as the assets, whether material or immaterial, that of those are involved in the same.
 
The unnamed injunction is therefore established as a mechanism of double protection or effectiveness of guarantee with respect to what every defendant intends, to obtain from the court a true effective jurisdictional protection.