Explanation of Article 523
The article clarified the effect of the judicial custody ruling; it decided that the court may rule for judicial custody over the disputed property in cases where there is no agreement on custody;
This ruling for the court in judicial custody allows the court to consider these cases as follows:
First case: If the dispute over the property is in a judicial dispute, the court is the one that undertakes the ruling for judicial custody, appointing the custodian, determining his task, his fee, and the duration of the custody.
Second case: If the property is threatened by a danger that puts it at risk of existence or reduction, the court is the one that undertakes the ruling for judicial custody, appointing the custodian, determining his task, his fee, and the duration of the custody.
What is stated in this article is not of public order; it is permissible to agree on what contradicts it, so it is permissible to agree that the custodian guarantees what perished without transgression or negligence on his part, or to increase his responsibility, and it is also permissible to agree to exempt him from liability for his mistake, or to increase his responsibility; unless it is due to fraud or gross error.
What is stated in this article differs from contractual custody; contractual custody is based on the agreement of the disputing parties, whereas judicial custody is based on the court's ruling;
Judicial custody is not limited to judicial disputes, but includes disputes that have not yet been brought to court;
Judicial custody is not limited to real estate, but includes movable property;
Judicial custody is not limited to property that is not feared to perish or be damaged, but includes property that is feared to perish or be damaged;
Judicial custody is not limited to property that requires expenses to preserve it, but includes property that does not require expenses to preserve it;
Judicial custody is not limited to property that remains in the custodian's possession causing harm to it, but includes property that remains in the custodian's possession without causing harm to it;
Judicial custody is not limited to property that is feared to perish or be damaged, but includes property that is not feared to perish or be damaged;
Judicial custody is not limited to property that requires expenses to preserve it, but includes property that does not require expenses to preserve it;
Judicial custody is not limited to property that remains in the custodian's possession causing harm to it, but includes property that remains in the custodian's possession without causing harm to it.
What is stated in this article is considered an application of the general rules in this system, and it is not of public order; it is permissible to agree on what contradicts it, so it is permissible to agree that the custodian guarantees what perished without transgression or negligence on his part, or to increase his responsibility, and it is also permissible to agree to exempt him from liability for his mistake, or to increase his responsibility; unless it is due to fraud or gross error.
Judicial custody remains until it is resolved.
Related To
Article 523
A receiver shall update the concerned parties with information relating to the performance of his task, and shall provide them with an account thereof on the dates and in the manner agreed upon by the parties or as ordered by the court.