scholarly journals Sources of Formation of Legal Positions of Russian Highest Judicial Bodies

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.

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 4 ◽  
pp. 48-58
Author(s):  
M. A. Fokina ◽  

Research objective is the analysis of practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on cases of indemnification caused to the environment. Proceeding their concepts of integrative right understanding the author reveals the importance of legal positions of the supreme judicial authorities for law-enforcement practice of inferior courts by hearing of cases about indemnification, caused to the environment. During the research gaps in the current legislation and ways of their completion in judicial practice are revealed. Methods. As methods of a research the legallistic method, synthesis, the analysis, induction, deduction were used. Results. The research showed certain shortcomings and gaps of legal regulation of an order of the indemnification caused the environment. Legal positions of the supreme courts which allowed to meet lacks and shortcomings of the legislation are revealed and analysed and to provide appropriate protection of the rights of citizens and legal entities.


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 60-75
Author(s):  
T. V. Fedorova ◽  

The review examines the procedure for judges of courts of General jurisdiction in resolving cases of administrative offenses under article 6.1.1 of the administrative Code of the Russian Federation, and analyzes the practice of courts in various regions of the Russian Federation. The paper offers solutions to controversial issues of judicial practice, considers the positions of the constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the circumstances to be clarified in the case of an administrative offense under article 6.1.1 of the administrative Code of the Russian Federation.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 27-30
Author(s):  
Elvina I. Fagmanova ◽  

The article is devoted to the research of the mechanism in the reconsidering judicial acts under reopened or new circumstances as providing the necessary deviation from the requirement of stability in judicial practice to correct an erroneous judicial act, an analysis of the grounds for reviewing and the importance of judicial review procedures in the system. The author pays an attention to discussions about the possibility of reconsidering a judicial act, due to the development of the position of the supreme court on legal issues, on its borders. The article also analyzes the most important judicial practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the ECHR, and the Resolutions of the Plenum of the Supreme court of the Russian Federation, which substantively reveal the approach of these courts to the mechanism in reconsidering judicial acts under reopened or new circumstances.


Author(s):  
Alexey S. Koshel ◽  
◽  

The article discusses the constitutional problems of consolidation, implementation and improvement of the mechanism of interaction between the parliament and higher courts in parliamentary procedures. The research methods are analysis, synthesis, normative (formal-logical), and historical-legal. The key aim of the study is to identify a mechanism for ensuring the control function of the parliament to control the implementation in the Russian Federation of laws adopted by the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation. The author came to the following conclusions. In recent years, the higher courts of the Russian Federation have been more actively involved in the work on improving legislation in various ways. At the same time, in his annual address to the Federal Assembly on January 15, 2020, President of Russia Vladimir Putin outlined proposals to strengthen the role of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in the legislative process. Since 2008, a trend has been outlined in Russia to strengthen the control powers of the parliament. One of the most important control powers of the Russian Federal Assembly, fixed in the Federal Law “On Parliamentary Control”, is, in the author’s opinion, the study of the application of laws (legal monitoring), the development of proposals for their improvement. However, along with the annual reports of the General Prosecutor of the Russian Federation at the Federation Council regarding effectiveness of legislation, it is seen necessary to oblige the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation to present reports on judicial practice in the State Duma. The Supreme Court, realizing the constitutional function of summarizing the judicial practice of the courts of the Russian Federation and developing a uniform interpretation of the norms of the law, often quite independently eliminates legal gaps, sometimes developing new legal rules, which is not fully consistent with the doctrine of separation of powers in continental law systems. Such new rules are developed within the framework of not only procedural law, but also substantive (civil and criminal) law. In fairness, it is worth noting that this is not a modern trend, it is the Russian practice that has developed over centuries: the Senate of the Russian Empire, being the highest court, developed new legal rules long before the legislator. All this, of course, does not fully correspond to the role of the court in the continental legal system. However, the same Senate of the Russian Empire, in accordance with the decree of Emperor Alexander I, also had the right to inform the emperor of the need to improve legislation. In this regard, taking into account the historical parallel, the author comes to the conclusion that there is an urgent need for Russia to introduce the annual practice of the Supreme Court’s reports to the State Duma as part of the parliamentary legal monitoring of legal gaps and conflicts identified by the Supreme Court when summarizing judicial practice, with its proposals for improving legislation.


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.


2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 170-174
Author(s):  
S G Pavlikov ◽  
V S Gabasov

It is proved that under the conditions of modern negative socio - economic situation need to become more active role of the Supreme Court as a body, in accordance with Art. 126 of the Russian Constitution gives clarifications on issues of judicial practice, the adoption of the resolutions of the Plenum of the workings of the courts of General jurisdiction in terms of attempts at encroachment on the sovereignty of the Russian Federation.


2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 66-80
Author(s):  
T. V. Fedorova ◽  

The review examines the rules and procedure for judges actions in resolving cases of administrative offenses with the application of the provisions of Article 2.7 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation; analyzes the practice of courts in various regions of the Russian Federation. Proposed solutions to controversial issues of judicial practice, the position of the constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the content and the relationship of the terms to be clarified in the case of an administrative offense, with the purpose of application of article 2.7 of the Administrative Code.


2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 47-52
Author(s):  
Lidia Terekhova

Introduction. Decisions made by the courts on emerging procedural issues are not subject to the rule of universal appeal and can be appealed only if there are two conditions specified in the law, the correctness of which is questioned in the literature. Purpose. The aim of the work is to substantiate the necessary conditions for an independent (separately from the decision) appeal of the rulings of the court of first instance. Methodology. The author used formal legal method, analysis, synthesis, formal logical method. Results. The proposals put forward in science are considered to supplement and amend the current civil procedural legislation in part of appealing the rulings of the court of first instance. The author, with reference to examples, noted that the current law does not always look fair and consistent in the sutuation of which particular definitions are subject to appeal. It is not always possible to agree with the legislator that he correctly singled out those definitions that are adopted on the most important procedural issues, delaying the verification of definitions on which may make it difficult or impossible to protect violated rights. Accordingly, there are reasonable claims that the legislator classifies specific definitions as appealed. The assignment of definitions to the number excluding the further movement of the case faces constant difficulties, since it is not always possible to understand by the nature of the definitions that they exclude the movement of the case. An important role in resolving disputes is played by the legal positions of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation periodically clarifies controversial issues when appealing against rulings that arise in judicial practice. The Constitutional Court clarifies both private issues and formulates general rules. Conclusion. The author recognizes the correct approach chosen in the current legislation, notes other than independent appeals, ways to protect rights, as well as the role of the highest judicial authorities in clarifying disputed situations. Thus, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation formulated a general rule: from the right to judicial protection guaranteed by the Constitution, the right to arbitrarily choose the procedure for appealing court decisions does not follow.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 66-79
Author(s):  
S. L. Morozov ◽  

The advent of the electronic currency and the effecting of electronic payments has caused new forms of thefts and types of acquisitive crimes. The judicial investigative practice of criminal cases of embezzlement committed using bank cards and other types of electronic payments has encountered problems with the qualification of such acts. The author identifies the most common enforcement problemsand their causesby a retrospective study of judicial practice, the changing norms of the criminal law. At the same time, a ten-year period of work of the judicial investigating authorities was studied. On the basis of traditional general scientific methods of cognition, as a result of a system-legal analysis of the considered set of specific situations, the author gives an author's view of the complex of causes that cause a lack of uniformity in judicial investigative practice. Using the hermeneutic approach, the author paid special attention to the application by the courts of the interpretation of the criminal law by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in different years. In conclusion, ways of resolving contentious issues of qualification of thefts and fraud in the field of electronic means of payment are proposed. It has been ascertained that high-quality and uniform law enforcement can provide additional clarification on the delimitation of related and competing theft from the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. It is concluded that in general, the current concept of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation does not contain contradictions with the novels of the criminal law, but can be improved. The rationale and edition of possible additions to the relevant decision of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation are given.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document