ANALYSIS OF CERTAIN ARTICLES OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION, THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AND THE ARBITRATION PROCEDURAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION IN RELATION TO CONCILIATION PROCEDURES

2020 ◽  
pp. 151-155
Author(s):  
I. V. Orlova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Procedural Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Proceedings

This article examines the possibility of using conciliation procedures and their results at different stages of civil, arbitration and administrative proceedings

scholarly journals Problems of correlation and distinctions of types of court proceedings, judgment and competence of civil and administrative cases

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (12) ◽  
pp. 133-137
Author(s):  
S. V. ZAVITOVA ◽  
◽  
YU. S. ARTAMONOVA ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Domestic Legislation ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Administrative Proceedings

The article analyzes the problem of correlation and distinction of types of legal proceedings, in particular, it considers how civil and administrative proceedings are qualified when considering certain categories of cases by courts of general jurisdiction at different stages of the process. In modern domestic legislation there are no clear criteria for distinguishing the type of legal proceedings when choosing a procedure for protecting violated rights, freedoms 134 IUS PUBLICUM ET PRIVATUM В 2015 г. вступил в силу Кодекс административного судопроизводства Российской Федерации (КАС РФ) – процедура защиты прав, законных интересов граждан и организаций от нарушений со стороны органов государственной власти была регламентирована и зафиксирована как самостоятельная правовая основа1 . Нельзя не заметить, что юридическое закрепление порядка рассмотрения дел и разрешения споров, возникших из административно-правовых отношений, в принятом КАС РФ спровоцировало появление коллизий при применении норм Гражданского процессуального кодекса Российской Федерации (ГПК РФ)2 и КАС РФ в процессе рассмотрения дел различных категорий. Кроме того, встал принципиальный вопрос: как правильно разграничить виды судопроизводства в целях должной защиты нарушенных прав? КАС РФ содержит перечень дел, подлежащих рассмотрению по правилам административного судопроизводства, но не дает разъяснения, в чем состоит отличие от дел, рассматриваемых в порядке гражданского судопроизводства. Верховным Судом Российской Федерации сформулированы правила определения вида судопроизводства для судов общей юрисдикции. Так, в первую очередь выделяется разграничение характера публичных и непубличных правоотношений. В данном случае во внимание берется наличие или отсутствие властных полномочий у субъектов административных правоотношений. Вовторых, Верховный Суд Российской Федерации рекомендует учитывать последствия, к которым приводят споры о признании решений, действия (бездействия) органов власти недействительными3. Изучение судебной практики показывает, что в некоторых случаях у судов возникали сложности при разрешении вопроса о том, в порядке какого судопроизводства следует рассматривать и разрешать дела об оспаривании решений, действий (бездействия) органов государственной власти, органов местного самоуправления, организаций, наделенных отдельными государственными или иными публичными полномочиями, должностных лиц, государственных и муниципальных служащих. Так, например, гражданин Р. обратился в Вологодский городской суд с административным исковым заявлением к БУЗ ВО «Вологодский областной наркологический диспансер № 1» о признании незаконными действий врача учреждения по проведению медицинского освидетельствования на состояние опьянения и акта медицинского освидетельствования на состояние опьянения. В обосновании требований истец указал, что медицинское освидетельствование в отношении него проведено в отсутствие законных оснований, акт медицинского освидетельствования не содержит сведений о концентрации каннабиноидов в исследованной пробе, копия акта незаконно направлена работодателю, что послужило основанием для увольнения. Определением Вологодского городского суда от 24.12.2018 гражданину Р. отказано в принятии административного искового заявления, поскольку акт медицинского освидетельствования на состояние опьянения не влечет самостоятельных последствий для лица, в отношении которого он составлен, следовательно, не может быть предметом самостоятельного оспаривания в суде. Также судом указано, что требования истца о признании незаконными действий врача по проведению медицинского освидетельствования на состояние опьянения подлежат рассмотрению в порядке, предусмотренном ГПК РФ. Суд апелляционной инстанции в своем определении от 06.03.2019 № 33а-1227/2019 and legitimate interests. The article analyzes the norms of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the Code of Administrative Procedure of the Russian Federation in determining the jurisdiction of cases to courts of general and arbitration jurisdiction and also touches on the issue of transition to consideration of cases according to the rules of civil and (or) administrative proceedings.

DEVELOPMENT OF STANDARDS FOR THE PREPARATION OF CIVIL CASES FOR TRIAL IN THE CIVIL LAW PROCEDURE CODES OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 165-190
Author(s):  
A.V. CHEKMAREVA
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
18Th Century ◽  
Central Place ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Arbitration Procedure ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Civil Cases ◽  
To Come ◽  
Administrative Proceedings

The article highlights the stages of development of legislation regulating preparatory procedural actions in civil cases in courts of general jurisdiction and arbitration courts. The author notes that the Decrees of Peter the Great had an important impact on setting the time limits for the performance of some procedural preparatory actions in the 18th century. The adoption of the Charter of Civil Procedure of 1864 consolidated preliminary written preparation as an important stage in the proceedings that carried out based on adversarial and equality of rights of the parties. The author comes to a conclusion that the stage of preparing the case for trial practically did not exist until 1929, since the 1923 Civil Procedure Code of the RSFSR reduced the essence of the preparation only to the judge’s right to collect necessary evidence for the resolve of the case at the request of the plaintiff and beyond the objections of the defendant. It is noted that the RSFSR Civil Procedure Code, adopted in 1964, also did not call the preparation of the case for trial a mandatory stage of the process; and only in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the RSFSR of 19 March 1969 “On the Preparation of Civil Cases for Trial” preparation was indicated as independent stage and is obligatory in every civil case. The author emphasizes that the adoption in 2002 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation significantly changed the preparation of the case for trial, imparting an adversarial character to the preparatory actions. The legislative fundamentalization of this stage allowed the author to present the preparation of the case for trial as a system consisting of two interconnected subsystems (guided and regulatory). The author notes that a systemic approach to studying the preparation of cases for consideration makes it possible to identify the role of preparatory procedures in civil procedure, to regulate the interaction between the court and the parties, to predict possible results from preparatory procedures, and find out the balance between the purposes and aims of preparation at each stage of the proceedings. A comparative analysis of the norms of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, which regulate the rules on the disclosure of evidence, made it possible to come to the conclusion that it is inexpedient to stipulate in the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation the obligation to disclose evidence without establishing measures of responsibility for its failure to comply. Attention is drawn to the inconsistency of the legislator, who defines Article 132 of the Code of Administrative Proceedings of the Russian Federation as “Aims of Preparing an Administrative Case for Trial”, but does not indicate any of them. The author offers a list of such aims. Noting the specifics of administrative proceedings, the author states that such a problem of preparing an administrative case for trial as reconciliation of the parties can be singled out with a certain degree of conditionality, since the court promotes the reconciliation of the parties if reconciliation is possible in this category of administrative cases. On the contrary, in civil and arbitration proceedings the central place in the modern model of preparatory procedures in the court of first instance should be occupied by two interrelated goals: the first is aimed at maximizing the possibilities of reconciliation of the parties, the second is aimed at the qualitative preparation of the case for consideration in court, in connection with which the importance of the stage of preparing the case for trial is growing, since in the event of conciliation or refusal of the claim, the goal of the proceedings can be achieved without trial. In her study of the problems of scientific understanding of the purposes and aims of both preparatory procedures and entire civil proceedings, the author comes to the conclusion that the effectiveness of judicial protection is directly dependent on the implementation of the targets based on constitutional provisions of civil, arbitration and administrative proceedings. Exploring foreign experience, the author points out that along with effective dispute resolution, a social function becomes an important component of the purpose of civil legal proceedings, without which domestic justice cannot do. In many ways, this should contribute to legislative consolidation of conciliation among the aims of civil, arbitration and administrative proceedings.

scholarly journals Some Issues on Mediation in Resolving Disputes in the Russian Federation

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
pp. 135-143
Author(s):  
A. N. Levushkin ◽  
V. V. Vorobev
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Knowledge And Skills ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Research Activities ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Procedural Code ◽  
Arbitration Procedure ◽  
The Russian Federation

The introduction of judicial reconciliation procedures in the arbitrazh, civil and administrative procedure can serve as a positive impetus for the development of a civilized and effective out-of-court dispute resolution in the Russian Federation. However, there are a number of provisions that are subject to critical analysis in the relevant norms of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, Civil Procedural Code of the Russian Federation, Administrative Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, and the Rules for conducting court mediation. Noteworthy are the rules establishing the requirements for candidates for judicial mediators regarding the need for retired judges to conduct research activities, which can hardly be justified. Due to the specificity of the conciliation procedure itself, it is also necessary to consider the issue of judicial mediators having knowledge and skills in the field of mediation. In this paper, the authors analyze some problems of mediation in resolving economic and other disputes in the Russian Federation and abroad, and propose some changes to the procedural legislation.

scholarly journals Problems and Prospects of Legal Regulation of the Status of Persons Contributing to the Administration of Justice in Civil Proceedings

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-115
Author(s):  
O. N. Gorodnova ◽  
A. A. Makarushkova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
Administration Of Justice ◽  
The Status ◽  
Procedural Code ◽  
The Russian Federation

Based on a comparative analysis of the norms of the procedural legislation of the Russian Federation, the paper discusses certain problems and prospects of legal regulation of the status of persons contributing to the administration of justice: expert, specialist, witness, interpreter, assistant judge, court clerk, as applied to civil proceedings.The authors analyze modern approaches to the persons contributing to the administration of justice, considering, along with traditional subjects, such a procedural figure as judicial representative in a civil procedure, taking into account the latest changes and additions to the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, entering into force on September 1, 2019.Based on a comparative analysis of the provisions of the arbitration and civil procedural laws, the authors of the paper point that the Civil Procedural Code of the Russian Federation lacks a separate chapter on legal regulation of the status of participants in civil proceedings, including those assisting in the administration of justice. This makes it difficult to establish the circle of such entities in practice. In this regard, they propose, by analogy with the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, to fix the circle of participants in the civil procedure in a separate chapter, revealing in detail and specifying the legal status in other articles of the Civil Procedural Code of the Russian Federation of other participants in the civil proceedings.In the paper, the authors conclude that the judicial representative must be considered as an independent subject of the civil proceedings. Finally, this problematic issue can only be resolved by making appropriate changes and additions to the Civil Procedural Code of the Russian Federation.It is noted that, despite the absence of special instructions in the Civil Procedural Code of the Russian Federation to other participants in the process, their list is not exhaustive and in fact, the circle of persons involved in the case is much wider. Such persons include court bailiffs and witnesses, whose legal status is currently debatable.

scholarly journals NOVELTIES OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AND THE ARBITRATION PROCEDURAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION CONCERNING REFUSAL OF JURISDICTION

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 40-45
Author(s):  
M. A. Agalarova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
International Jurisdiction ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Procedural Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Civil Cases ◽  
Legal Meaning

In this article, the author touches upon the recent changes made by the Federal Law dated 28.11.2018 № 451-FZ On amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation related to the rejection of the term jurisdiction. The reasons for such changes, as well as positive and negative features of the replacement of jurisdiction by competence are investigated. The author analyzes the legal meaning of each concept jurisdiction and competence. The problem of impact of such changes on the international jurisdiction, which arises in the course of consideration and resolution of civil cases involving foreign persons in civil and arbitration processes, is noted.

Commentary to the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation (continuation)

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 73-111
Author(s):  
M.R. Zagidullin ◽  
◽  
I.V. IReshetnikova ◽  
R.B. Sitdikov ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation

Evidence and Proof in Civil and Administrative Proceedings: Comparative Legal Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 72-76
Author(s):  
Yu. R. Sirazitdinova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Proceedings ◽  
Evidence And Proof

By comparing the article, some questions of proof and evidence are examined in the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, agribusiness of the Russian Federation, CAS of the Russian Federation. An attempt has been made to develop proposals for amending Articles 62 and 122 of the CAS RF.

SECURING EVIDENCE IN CIVIL PROCEDURE: DEVELOPMENT OF THEORY, LEGISLATIVE AND PRACTICE

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 159-190
Author(s):  
E.I. NOSYREVA ◽  
D.G. FILCHENKO
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Theoretical Concepts ◽  
Civil Process ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Arbitration Procedure ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Assessment Of Evidence

The article presents an analysis of the institution of securing evidence in the civil process from the point of view of the development of its legal regulation, doctrine and practice. The teaching of professor M.K. Treushnikov on the evidence is taken as a basis. Through the prism of his ideas, theoretical concepts of securing evidence are revealed, from prerevolutionary works to modern research; the sequence of the formation of norms on the securing evidence on the example of procedural codes of various periods; trends in the law practice of securing evidence. The correlation of the securing evidence with the elements of the judicial proof is revealed. It is substantiated that the securing evidence includes such elements of the structure of judicial proof as: indication of facts, indication of evidence and preliminary assessment. The end result of the procedural action to secure evidence is the possibility of implementing all subsequent elements – presentation, disclosure, investigation and final assessment of evidence. Conclusions are formulated on the results of the development of the institution of securing evidence, which from rather brief and obvious provisions of procedural legislation, a few practice has turned into an actual procedural activity. Its demand is predicted to grow in the context of digitalization of information, as well as due to the possibility of using it in the framework of arbitration. At the same time, an increase in the number of cases of unfounded appeal of interested parties to actions to secure evidence is noted. The authors support a critical assessment of the rule of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation that the securing evidence is carried out by the arbitration court according to the rules for securing a claim, and a proposal for a unified regulation of this institution in accordance with the rules of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document