[[1] In the theory maintained is the other thesis that “only the right of the party concerned for cassation appeal does not incur of the presence of appellate judgment (ruled, prepared and announced with the contents and the form in accordance with the statutory provisions - art. 235, 236 of Civil-Procedure Code). The subjective procedural right of cassation appeal is result of the specific inspection, carried out by the Supreme Court of Cassation itself, regarding the presence of special conditions, foreseen in art. 280, par. 1 of Civil-Procedure Code. The right of cassation appeal is not precondition by the inspection under art. 288 of Civil-Procedure Code. It incurs with the positive result of its conduction and has as its source (grounds, judicial fact) the ruling of Supreme Court of Cassation, ruled in this proceeding. Prior to the ruling of Supreme Court of Cassation regarding the criteria for access to cassation appeal the right of cassation appeal is still not existing - it has not incurred or its carriers. This right is not a predicate, it is sequence of the legal activity under art. 288 of Civil-Procedure Code.” See Mingova, A. “Why the judgments of Supreme Court of Cassation are not liable to appeal under art. 288 of Civil-Procedure Code” - Norm, book 5/2013, page 98-99.]Search in Google Scholar
[[2] Author’s remark. The considerations of the legislator, having conditioned the establishment of this order, according to sufficiently inconclusive are: “The possibility to restrict the access to regular third instance according to the nature of the case is reasoned with the competence of the Supreme Court of Cassation to rule interpretative resolutions on all matters as this way it will fulfill its obligation to secure the uniform application of law and development of law and on those types of cases on which it does not rule as regular third instance. The possibility to restrict the access to regular third instance according to the interest is reasoned with the fact that by ruling on cases with bigger interest, the Supreme Court of Cassation secures the uniform application of low on all cases.” See Motives to project of Civil-Procedure Code.]Search in Google Scholar
[[3] Such as Ivanova, R., Punev, B. and Chernev, S. Comment on the new Civil-Procedure Code, Publishing house “Labor and Law”, 2008, page 436]Search in Google Scholar
[[4] In the theory maintained is the reverse statement that “the right of the party concerned itself for cassation appeal does not incur from the presence of appellate resolution (rules, compiled and announced with the contents and form according to the statutory provisions - art. 235, 236 of Civil-Procedure Code). The subjective procedural law of cassation appeal is result of specific inspection made by the Supreme Court of Cassation itself, regarding the presence of special conditions, foreseen in art. 280, par. 1 of Civil- Procedure Code. The right of cassation appeal is not preconditioned by the inspection under art. 288 of Civil-Procedure Code. It is caused by the positive result of its conduction and is sourced (grounds, judicial fact) by the ruling of the Supreme Court of Cassation, ruled in this proceeding. Prior to ruling of the Supreme Court of Cassation regarding the criteria for access to cassation appeal the right of cassation appeal still does not exist - it has not incurred for its carriers. This right is not a predicate but is consequence of the judicial activity under art. 288 of Civil-Procedure Code. See Mingova, A. Why the ruling by Supreme Court of Cassation under art. 288 of Civil-Procedure Code are not liable to appeal? - Norma, book 5 /2013, page 98-99.]Search in Google Scholar
[[5] Така и Тодоров, К. „Следва ли да подлежи на обжалване определението по чл. 288 ГПК?“ - Търговско и облигационно право, кн. 6/ 2015 г., с. 59.]Search in Google Scholar
