Conciliatory Justice in Modern Russia

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 19
Author(s):  
Katerina DREMOVA

The research studies conciliatory justice in modern Russia. Its formation and peculiarities in the institution of alternative ways of resolving legal conflict on the example of mediation are considered. Various views regarding the mediation definition are analyzed, and the author's vision of this category concept is given. The origins of mediation history abroad and in Russia are studied. The essence and peculiarities of mediation application as an alternative method of economic disputes settlement are characterized. The benefits of using conciliatory procedures in a business environment are revealed. The main aspects of the procedural legislation reform initiated by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation concerning the change in the legal regulation of conciliatory procedures application in the settlement of legal conflicts are outlined. It is noted that the beginning of procedural reform in Russia with regard to dispute settlement through conciliatory procedures was triggered by the resolution of the plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation ‘On submission to the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of Russian Federation a federal law draft ‘On amendments to a number of legislative acts of the Russian Federation in connection with conciliatory procedure improvements’ adopted on 18 January 2018 and the resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation. Statistics on the ratio of dismissals agreed, dispute settlement through the mediation procedure, as well as plaintiff-triggered dismissals are provided. Methodology: the study is carried out on the basis of the universal method on scientific study of the social development principles –dialectical materialism provisions, as well as general and specific scientific methods: dogmatic, regulatory legal, legal comparative, fragmented historical and legal, case studies (statistical data and judicial statistics analysis), logical (hypotheses, analogy, modeling, analysis and synthesis methods), philosophic (axiological, derivation methods on the basis of priori and axiomatic provisions), generalization and abstraction methods. Conclusions: To date, entrepreneurs are increasingly using conciliatory procedures when settling disputes. This way of dispute settlement becomes very convenient, businessmen are not in the need to spend their time on litigation, often protracted, but can settle issues more quickly and effectively. Today, conciliatory justice in the Russian Federation is going through the stage of formation and development and in the future is to become a demanded institution of judicial law.

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 282-298
Author(s):  
D.G. FILCHENKO ◽  
E.A. EVTUKHOVICH

The article analyzes the provisions of the arbitration procedural legislation and the practice of its application on a different pre-trial dispute settlement procedure established by the contract. A different pre-trial procedure is considered as an alternative to the general claim procedure for resolving disputes. The characteristic features of a different pre-trial order have been revealed. The authors summarized the practice of arbitration courts, highlighting other demanded pre-trial dispute settlement procedures. In particular, examples of atypical other methods of dispute settlement are provided. Separately, the issue of the admissibility of the cancellation of the general claim procedure for the settlement of disputes by the agreement was considered. An independent subject of the authors’ analysis was mediation as a pre-trial dispute settlement procedure. The work also focuses on the impact of a different pre-trial dispute settlement procedure on the course of the limitation period. The article discusses the provisions of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of 22 June 2021 No. 18 “On Some Issues of Pre-Trial Settlement of Disputes Considered in Civil and Arbitration Proceedings”. Some of the recommendations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation received critical assessment. The authors note the existing contradictions in the legislation and possible ways to overcome them, formulate individual conclusions as a result of studying the materials of the practice of arbitration courts.


2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (6) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Татьяна Шуберт ◽  
Tatyana Shubert

The article examines the ECHR legal nature and types of its decisions, analyzes the activities of the Government of the Russian Federation and the RF Ministry of Justice on the implementation of the European Court of Human Rights’ judgments. The author notes the role of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in ensuring uniform application of the Convention and Protocols thereto, ratified by the Russian Federation, by the courts of general jurisdiction. The author analyzes reasons for slow and incomplete implementation of the ECHR decisions, and comes up with the measures for their implementation. The article discusses peculiarities of the execution of the ECHR judgments in the Russian Federation: mechanistic execution of the decisions, lack of a systematic approach to the legislation analysis, absence of identification of causes for non-compliance of the regulations with the Convention on Rights of Man and Citizen, lack of coordination between bodies executing the ECHR decisions, inadequate budgetary procedures and lack of funds. The author proposes to analyze structural and general deficiencies in the national law and practice with regard to the ECHR decisions; provides recommendations to improve the mechanism for the judicial decisions’ implementation; determines lines of development for legal regulation of relations in the field of ECHR judgments’ implementation in the Russian legislation.


Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 19-27
Author(s):  
O. N. Nizamieva

The article has analyzed the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on family disputes that involve property issues, revealed features of implementation of functions of the highest court in this field. First, it is stated that the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation reviews decisions of lower courts mainly in cases where the application of family law rules is contradictory and unsettled. It is necessary to fill in a gap in family law, to resolve conflicts between certain legal norms, to choose between several possible interpretations of the law. Second, the judicial panels of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, making a determination on a particular case, clarify the meaning of legal norms, and sometimes under the guise of interpretation in fact correct ill-considered or outdated norms of family law. Third, the High Court reviews cases where there is a typical and widespread error in the application of a very clear and defined rule. Fourth, in individual legal acts it is possible to observe the concretization or change of the previously designated legal stances while maintaining the legislative rules in the same form. Using certain examples of cases considered by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on family disputes concerning property, the paper has demonstrated the mechanism of possible transformation of abstract, non-personified and doctrinally oriented provisions contained in the definitions of judicial boards of the Supreme Court to general legal regulators. The author has determined certain problems of legal regulation of property relations in the family that have not been settled by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 54-56
Author(s):  
Aleksey S. Lizunov ◽  

The article draws attention to the imperfection of the legal regulation of certain procedural terms in the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation. The position of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation was recognized as unjustified, regarding the recognition of the time frame for drawing up and further forwarding the protocol on an administrative offense for the consideration of the case as non-restrictive. A proposal has been formulated to legislatively consolidate the provision that a protocol on an administrative offense should be drawn up and sent for consideration as soon as possible, but not beyond the statute of limitations for bringing to administrative responsibility.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (12) ◽  
pp. 62-67
Author(s):  
E. A. BABAYANTS ◽  

Discussions caused by the initiative of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the introduction of a new category of offenses – criminal infraction which can occupy an intermediate link between an administrative offense and a criminal offense – do not stop. The article reveals the concept of a criminal infraction, lists its main features, considers the feasibility of introducing this category into domestic criminal legislation. A brief analysis of the legislation of a number of foreign countries is also given, the possibility of applying such experience in Russian conditions is assessed. The conclusion is formulated that it is necessary to recognize as fair the arguments challenging the necessity of adopting the draft law in the form in which it was submitted for consideration by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. Attention is drawn to the fact that in those countries where the category of criminal offense was introduced, a fundamental reform of the criminal legislation was required: a total revision of the norms of the existing criminal legislation or the adoption of a separate Code of criminal infractions (for example, in Kyrgyzstan). Based on this the draft law under consideration appears to be a half-measure, which will lead to the complication of the existing legal regulation. The most correct way to resolve the problem under consideration would be to reduce the number of minor offenses in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation


2021 ◽  
pp. 130-142
Author(s):  
Mariia Viktorovna Globa

The present study is devoted to determining the place and role of legal positions of higher judicial bodies of Russia (judicial legal positions) in the mechanism of legal regulation. Let us specify in advance that the author means the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation (taking into account the 2014 amendments made to the legislation concerning the liquidation of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation) as the higher judicial bodies of Russia. Establishing the meaning and role of judicial legal positions in the mechanism of legal regulation is carried out by the author of this study through the analysis and demonstration of the main sources of formation of legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation. In this regard, the author of this work identifies as sources of formation of judicial legal positions: legal and non-legal. Non-legal sources of formation of legal positions of the highest courts of Russia differ from the legal ones in the fact that initially they do not have material expression, exist in the abstract, however, have no less importance for the process of formation of judicial legal positions. To the legal sources of creating legal positions of the highest judicial bodies of Russia the author includes: formal sources of law, current legal practice, legal doctrine. As non-legal sources of formation of legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation are: the inner conviction of a judge and professional legal consciousness of a judge. The author of this scientific research consistently reveals the importance and role of each source of formation of judicial legal positions. The conducted study of the most significant sources of formation of judicial legal positions allowed to better understand the place of legal positions of higher courts of Russia in the legal system and their role in legal regulation, which is reduced not just to the interpretation of judicial acts, but also to the formation of new legal provisions, which ultimately form a uniform judicial practice. Methodological basis of the study consisted of: analysis, synthesis, comparative-legal method, deduction, induction and other ways of knowledge used in science. Scientific conclusions and proposals contained in this work may serve as a basis for further theoretical study of the problems of judicial legal positions and used in the activities of legislative and law enforcement bodies.


Author(s):  
Yekaterina Yakimova

The research of issues connected with the analysis of business risks is relevant because of the problem of qualifying the actions of entrepreneurs under the fraud-related Articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Besides, the development of technologies increases the number of frauds in the digital environment, which makes it necessary to determine key features of fraudulent actions connected with the changes in the economic organization of the society connected with the digital transformation of some branches of the world economy in general and Russian economy in particular, of the social sphere, and of the specifics of public administration of some areas of life. The responsiveness of lawmakers manifested in amending a group of Articles in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation regarding the legal characteristics of fraud, shows that there are some problems in the legislative regulation of this sphere. The author believes that they are caused by an attempt to assess the degree of freedom of enterprise and the degree of involvement of each side of legal relations in the risk of investment. The analysis of legislation, the law enforcement practice, statistical data give reason to believe that most of the problems of legislative understanding of fraud in entrepreneurship are not connected with contradictions in the legal regulation, but rather with the drawbacks of the law enforcement practice, the prevalence of repressive methodology in classifying the actions of entrepreneurs and the inner conviction of the law enforcement employees that entrepreneurs intentionally strive to obtain negative results in any, and primarily entrepreneurial, activities. The author argues that further improvement of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation will not yield any tangible results, which testifies to a considerable transformation of the fraud-related Articles in the last 15 years. Changes in the practice of enforcement of the criminal law’s articles regarding fraud are only possible after the principles of such work are worked out by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, who at present pays much attention to this issue, although some clauses of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation require further analysis and improvement.


Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 63-74
Author(s):  
D. P. Velikiy

The paper discusses the issue of a special legal approach to interpretation of norms of criminal procedure law. On the example of criminal procedural law the author substantiates the independent character of the special legal method of interpretation, its difference from the grammatical and systematic (systemic) methods of interpretation of law, as well as the place of this method among other means of interpretation. The subject of special legal interpretation include: special legal terms, concepts, categories, legal structures, types (regularities) of legal regulation, rules of legal technique, theoretical provisions. The vast majority of such interpretations were carried out by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, which is predetermined by the need for a common understanding of criminal procedural terminology. Unlike grammatical interpretation, which provides a linguistic analysis of the text of the law, systematic interpretation in which interpretation takes into account the place of the norm in the systemic relationship with other norms, in special legal interpretation the main source of information is legal knowledge, i.e. the knowledge of law and legal theory. If a special legal interpretation is carried out by an official body, it is usually normative. Also, based on the legal stances of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the author gives examples of “evolution” of legal standings from special legal interpretation to adoption and amendment of legal norms. The article investigates the judicial practice containing the results of special legal interpretation of criminal procedural rules, e.g. legal concepts and terms defined by the same words, but having different meaning depending on the branch of law in which they are used. The author also gives examples of determination of the branch of law to which the norm belongs by means of special legal interpretation.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 32-36
Author(s):  
Andrey V. Nikulenko ◽  
◽  
Maksim A. Smirnov ◽  

The article is dedicated to justifiable defense as a circumstance excluding the criminal character of an act pursuant to criminal laws of the Russian Federation. The authors cover some issues concerning the application of provisions stipulated by Article 37 of the Criminal Code of Russia. The research of these provisions allows identifying the advantages and disadvantages of the legal regulation of justifiable defense including the disadvantages of the judicial and investigative practice. The paper criticizes the existing approach and offers ways to solve the indicated problems including by means of amendment of resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 19 of September 27, 2012, On the Judicial Application of Laws on Justifiable Defense and Causing of Damage in the Course of Detention of a Criminal. The authors suggest a means of possible reconstruction of the corresponding provisions of Article 37 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in view of ambiguous and often inconsistent practice of application of criminal law provisions on justifiable defense.


2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 123-132
Author(s):  
Anna V. Nikitina

Subject. The article is devoted to analysis of some issues concerning realization of adversary principal in proceedings in the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation.Purpose. The purpose of the article is to analyze foreign experience of legal regulation of the status of constitutional court process participants as parties and/or interested persons in constitutional court proceeding, to give arguments in favor of introducing the category of ‘interested privies’ in Russian legislation regulating constitutional court proceedings.Methodology. The author uses theoretical analysis as well as legal methods including formal legal analysis and the method of legal comparison.Results, scope of application. Law often does not specify the party opposing the claimant during the proceedings in the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The need to introduce the adversary principal in such cases requires to introduce the category of ‘interested privies’, whose rights and duties may be affected during the case solution in the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation.The following persons and entities may become interested privies in Constitutional proceedingst: persons whose claims brought against the decision of intergovernmental body for protecting human rights and freedoms - in cases on possibility of executing the decision of intergovernmental body for protecting human rights and freedoms; the State Duma and the Council of Federation of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation as bodies participating in ratification of the treaty - in cases on the check of constitutional legitimacy of a treaty about accepting new subject into the Russian Federation; constitutional bodies and public offices whose constitutional legal status may be changed as a result of official interpretation of constitutional rules - in cases on interpreting the Constitution; the RF Central Election Committee - in cases on the check of constitutional legitimacy of an issue introduced for the referendum of the Russian Federation; the President of the Russian Federation (if the request comes from the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation); the State Duma, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, President of the Russian Federation - in cases on providing the ruling about the observance of the established rules public prosecution of the President of the Russian Federation for treason or another serious offence.Conclusions. The category ‘interested persons’ will enable to provide guarantee of fair trial in resolving constitutional court conflicts, if such category would be included into Russian legislation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document