Electronic proceedings in the courts of verification instances as one of the digital modifications of justice in civil cases

The article reveals the main features of the judicial system transformation as a result of the October procedural reform, when the appeal and cassation systems of general jurisdiction began to function in the Russian Federation. The author aims to conduct a comprehensive study of the possibilities of appellate and cassation instances digitalization. Dialectical, analytical, comparative and structural methods used in considering the most relevant legislative innovation help to demonstrate the conflict between digitalization and the creation of structurally independent courts. The author notes the complication of the implementation of the mechanism of the right to judicial protection in the conditions of positive dynamics of the functioning of new units. Analyzing the procedural features of the current procedure for initiating proceedings in the verification instances, the author comes to the conclusion that it is necessary to digitally modernize the administration of justice in courts of appeal and cassation courts. New approaches to the introduction of electronic communication are proposed by creating a modern functional for the implementation of the right of appeal and cassation by analogy with the existing mechanisms for the provision of public services. The results of the study can become a trigger for further reform of the judicial system in the light of the digitalization of justice in civil cases.

SPECIFICS OF ESTABLISHING JURISDICTION OVER ENVIRONMENTAL DISPUTES

This article deals with the problems of establishing jurisdiction over environmental disputes. The issues under consideration are relevant in the context of Russian regulation because both commercial courts and courts of general jurisdiction could be competent to hear the disputes, which inevitably entails difficulties for both the applicants and the courts themselves as the provided case law demonstrates. Besides, the issues are topical because of the numerous changes of Russian supreme courts’ approaches towards them, and also due to the procedural reform of 2019. Relevance in the context of international regulation is due to lack of specialised rules for establishing international jurisdiction over environmental disputes, while the rules on international jurisdiction over tort disputes are not fully effective. The article also analyses the rules on jurisdiction over tort disputes provided for by Russian procedural codes. The article concludes that in the absence of clear rules on the competence of arbitration and general courts to hear environmental disputes, significant differences between the rules of the codes affect the implementation of the principle of legal certainty in considering this type of disputes.

The Dual Competence Issue: What Has the Procedural Reform Failed to Do?

The article addresses the problem of “dual competence” that supposes the disputes with the same subject and cause of action might be heard both by commercial courts and general jurisdiction courts even there are the same legislation should be applied. It is concluded that the competence rules should not be construed at will depending only on parties to a dispute if there are the same legislation should be applied.

Results of the Procedural Reform of the Corporate Dispute Resolution Procedure

The article examines some of the results of the procedural reform in terms of the resolution of corporate disputes by courts. The authors formulated four main theses that reflect the essence of this reform: the division of competence in corporate disputes between courts of general jurisdiction and arbitration courts, the expansion of the arbitrability of corporate disputes, the implementation of the principle of one-time consideration of a corporate dispute, the consolidation of new subjects of civil proceedings in corporate disputes not named in the general part of the Commercial Procedure Code of the RF and the Code of Civil Procedure of the RF.

A Procedural Reform in Bankruptcy: Extrajudicial Compilation of a Register of Claims

The article is devoted to some aspects and problems of reforms in Russian insolvency proceedings these days. Changes are connected with the procedural arrangements of consideration of the crucial detached disputes — disputes over including claims into the list of creditors. The author comes to the conclusion of necessity to honor peculiarities and value of the acts of court as a legal phenomenon whilst changing law.

Availability of Justice and Optimization of Procedure within the Framework of a Procedural Reform (on the Example of Provisions on Terms of Case Review by First Instance Courts)

In this article the author analysis сchanges made to the procedural legislation of Russia as part of the reform 2018 with regard to the ratio of the idea of optimization and the principle of access to justice. The main object of analysis is general terms of consideration of cases in courts of first instance.

Reformation of Summary Proceedings: Aims and Results

The article analyzes the changes made by Federal law No. 451-FZ of November 23, 2018 to the procedure for consideration of cases in simplified proceedings in civil proceedings. It is noted that the main goal of the procedural reform was to continue the development of civil procedural legislation in order to unify it.

Parliamentary Procedure under Theresa May: Nothing Has Changed?

During the premiership of Theresa May, parliamentary procedure in the UK was scrutinised, criticised and challenged to an extent unprecedented in recent years. This put intense pressure on the ‘rules of the game’ governing parliamentary politics. This article thus aims to answer three questions. First, what were the pressures on parliamentary procedure in this period? Secondly, what were their consequences? Thirdly, how can these consequences be explained? The article addresses these questions by describing challenges to the House of Commons’ rules regarding agenda control, proxy voting and private members’ bills. It also describes the procedural changes resulting from these challenges and evaluates their significance. Finally, it considers how far these changes support the expectations of existing literature on parliamentary rule changes. Overall, the article shows that procedural reform during Theresa May’s premiership was minimal. Despite some temporary informal innovations, the formal rules of the Commons remained almost entirely unchanged. During this period, therefore, Britain’s parliamentary rules were challenged extensively but changed very little.