Praeside Deo Optimo Maximo: Ex decreto et authoritate amplissimi Iurisconsultorum Collegii in inclyta Basiliensium Academia, pro solenni Docturae gradu in utroque Iure consequendo, subsequentes de litis contestatione Theses

XXXIII.
Although by Pontifical law a cleric cannot otherwise consent to a judge who is not his own, unless the judge is an ecclesiastical person, and the will of the Diocesan and Bishop is present.

XXXIV.
The contestation of a suit concerns causes both civil and criminal.

XXXV.
By old law, there was room for the contestation of a suit in all causes in which a formula of action had been obtained from the Praetor.

XXXVI.
Today, however, in all causes in which one does not act summarily, but according to an ordinarily instituted legal process, the contestation of a suit is required.

XXXVII.
But by the common opinion of interpreters, it is not regularly required in those causes in which a libellus written pleading can be omitted.

XXXVIII.
It has also commonly prevailed that in a case of appeal, if an appeal has been made from a definitive sentence, a contestation of a suit is not required, provided that it intervened in the first instance; however, it is observed otherwise in court today.

XXXIX.
For in the court of the Imperial Chamber, a contestation of a suit is regularly necessary in all causes that are brought into judgment through an appeal: as is provided in the Ordinance of the Chamber, part 3, title 32, section 4. Note Andrew Gail, Practical Observations, book 1, observation 66.

XL.
For a similar reason, it is also frequently asked whether a contestation of a suit is required in a case of nullity: where it seems necessary to make a distinction.