Libro Quinto Título III. Intervencion de terceros

Whoever intervenes in proceedings in accordance with Article 56 of this Code must do so in writing or orally, according to the nature of the proceedings, before the same judge who hears the principal matter and in the terms prescribed for filing a claim.

The intervention of third parties who do not have an own and certain interest in its existence shall not be admitted, even if its exercise is pending a time limit and condition.

The judge shall decide outright the admission or rejection of the third party, if the judge has sufficient elements to do so with the accompanying evidence.

The assisting third party is deemed to be one and the same party as the one whom it assists, and must take the proceedings in the state in which they are found; it may not suspend the course thereof, nor allege nor prove what is prohibited to the principal.

Third parties alleging a right of ownership or preference, once their admission to the proceedings has been resolved, shall be granted an evidence term of ten days, common to all those who litigate.

This term shall not be granted if the third party appears after the hearing of the proceedings has been held or if judgment is pending, except for the powers of the judge to better decide.

Third-party interventions may be filed in any proceedings, unless otherwise provided.

Third-party interventions, of whatever kind, brought in proceedings other than enforcement proceedings, shall be decided together with the main matter, in the judgment, which shall rule on whether the third-party intervention is well-founded or unfounded, the judge having to make the corresponding declarations.

To decide third-party interventions filed in enforcement proceedings, the following rules shall be observed:

1st. If the third-party intervention is supporting, it shall be decided together with the main matter.

2nd. If the third-party intervention seeks exclusion of ownership, it shall be decided by the procedure for incidents.

3rd. If the third-party intervention seeks exclusion based on preference, it shall be processed as an incident, but such incident shall be decided before the auction sale or payment, as applicable.

In third-party ownership claims, while the respective incident is unresolved, the auction sale of the property may not be ordered, the proceedings being suspended from that time until the third-party claim is decided.

If the third-party claim is one of preference, while the decision ranking the credits has not been issued, payment may not be ordered, which shall be made to the creditor with the better right. Meanwhile, while the third-party claim is being decided, the sale price shall be deposited in the Treasury of Justice Funds.

Those who intervene as third parties alleging a preferential right may urge the continuation of the execution while they retain an interest therein.

When third-party intervention is proper, in accordance with Article 57, the summoned person shall be heard for twenty-four hours. If there is controversy as to whether or not he should enter the proceedings, it shall be processed and resolved as an incident, without interrupting the course of the principal proceedings.

If the summoned person appears in the proceedings, he shall be deemed a coadyuvant of the party with whom the interest he has is linked. If he assumes responsibility for the proceedings, he shall be deemed the principal party.

Even if the summoned party has not answered within the hearing period, they may intervene in the proceedings at whatever stage the proceedings are in, before the judgment becomes final, without thereby interrupting the course of the proceedings.

The summoned party has the right to request that other co-obligors, if any, be summoned, provided they do so within the hearing period granted to them, the provisions of the preceding article applying in this case.