How to cancel a court decision that was made without your participation (default judgment): 4 simple steps

If the defendant fails to appear at the trial (when taking measures based on notification), the judge makes a decision in absentia. A default judgment is a judicial act adopted in the absence of the full number of participants in the case, in order to end the proceedings.

1. Grounds for canceling a default judgment
2. Objection to cancellation of default judgment
3. Refusal to cancel a default judgment
4. Procedure for canceling a default judgment
5. Deadline for filing an application to cancel a default judgment
6. What happens after the default judgment is cancelled?
7. Sample application for cancellation of a default judgment due to improper notification

Cancellation of a default judgment is possible upon application. It is correct to use this procedure and let’s understand in order why it is beneficial to cancel a decision in absentia, and not to appeal through filing an appeal.

Grounds for canceling a default judgment

There are not many reasons for canceling a default judgment. One of the main reasons is that the defendant may not appear in court. But his reasons must be valid, and if he could not inform the court about these circumstances in advance, otherwise this will not be a reason for canceling the default judgment.

The defendant collects certain documents to prove that the reasons for failure to appear were indeed valid and the court determines whether or not to cancel the decision in absentia.

Also, there comes a time when the court needs to notify the parties to the proceeding about the date and time of the trial; in this case, the basis for canceling the default judgment may be improper notification of the trial. This is also the reason for canceling the default judgment, because It is not possible to be in the process without parties who have not been notified.

In addition, it is necessary to explain to the court, when filing an application to cancel a default judgment, what circumstances the court incorrectly indicated in the decision, gave an improper assessment, and it is possible to present evidence that will turn the whole case around. It must be remembered that the abolition of default is not a delay in the consideration of the case with the help of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, but a real way to achieve a fair and legal court decision.

Judge Tyurin A.S. Case No. 33-875/2019

APPEAL DECISION

Judicial panel for civil cases of the Yaroslavl Regional Court consisting of:

presiding Semikolenny T.V.

judges Piskunova V.A., Emelyanova Yu.V.

under secretary E.V. Klinova

considered in open court in Yaroslavl

January 28, 2021

civil case based on a private complaint from the MARSH HOA against the ruling of the Leninsky District Court of Yaroslavl dated December 19, 2021, which decided:

The application of the MARSH Homeowners Association to restore the deadline for filing an appeal against the absentee decision of the Leninsky District Court of Yaroslavl dated August 13, 2018 is rejected.

Having heard the report of Judge V.A. Piskunova, the judicial panel

INSTALLED:

By absentee decision of the Leninsky District Court of Yaroslavl dated August 13, 2018, the claim of S.P. Bukharin was partially satisfied. to HOA "MARSH" on the protection of consumer rights.

A copy of the court's decision in absentia was sent to the defendant HOA "MARCH" at the place of its state registration by mail on August 17, 2018, the court correspondence was not received by the defendant, and was returned to the court after the expiration of the storage period on August 31, 2018.

On September 27, 2018, the court received an application from the defendant to cancel the default judgment, containing a request to restore the deadline.

On October 10, 2018, by a ruling of the Leninsky District Court of Yaroslavl, the restoration of the deadline for filing an application to cancel the default decision of the MARCH HOA was denied. In accordance with the appeal ruling dated November 12, 2018, the ruling of the Leninsky District Court of Yaroslavl dated October 10, 2018 was upheld.

On November 28, 2018, the Leninsky District Court of Yaroslavl received an appeal from the MARCH HOA, which filed a petition to restore the deadline for filing an appeal.

The court made the above determination, which the MARSH HOA does not agree with.

In a private complaint, he asks the court's ruling to be quashed. The arguments of the complaint boil down to the court's violation of the rules of procedural law and the discrepancy between the court's conclusions and the actual circumstances of the case.

Having verified the legality and validity of the court’s ruling and having studied the case materials, the panel of judges believes the following.

In allowing the application to restore the missed procedural deadline for filing an appeal, the court came to the conclusion that there were no grounds for reinstating the deadline, since the complaint and the application to restore the deadline for filing an appeal were filed after the expiration of the deadline for filing an appeal, provided for in Part 2 of Article 237 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, there are no valid reasons for missing the deadline.

According to the judicial panel, there are grounds for reinstating the deadline for appealing the court's decision in absentia.

In accordance with Part 1 of Article 112 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, persons who missed the procedural deadline established by federal law for reasons recognized by the court as valid, the missed deadline may be restored.

According to Part 1 of Article 237 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the defendant has the right to file with the court that made the decision in absentia an application to cancel this court decision within seven days from the date of delivery of a copy of this decision to him.

A court decision in absentia may also be appealed by the parties on appeal within a month after the expiration of the deadline for the defendant to file an application to cancel this court decision, and if such an application is filed, within a month from the date of the court’s decision to refuse this application. (Part 2 of Article 237 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

According to the position of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, expressed in the Review of judicial practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 2 (2015), approved by the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on June 26, 2015, in order to implement the principle of legal certainty in the event that the court does not have information about the delivery of a copy of the decision in absentia to the defendant, such The court decision enters into legal force after the expiration of the totality of the following deadlines: a three-day period for sending a copy of the decision to the defendant, a seven-day period given to the defendant to file an application to cancel the decision and a month for appealing the decision in absentia on appeal. However, when the court resolves the issue on the acceptance for consideration of an application to cancel a decision in absentia or an appeal against such a decision does not exclude the possibility of applying the rules enshrined in Article 112 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation on the restoration of procedural deadlines.

Thus, if it is established that a copy of the default decision was served on the defendant after the expiration of the period for filing an application for its cancellation, but before the expiration of the period for filing an appeal against this decision, then the period for filing such an application may be restored by the court, provided that the application the restoration of this period was filed within the period for appeal.

If the defendant is served with a copy of the decision in absentia after the deadline for his appeal has expired, the missed deadline for filing an application to cancel this decision cannot be restored. In this case, the missed deadline for filing an appeal against such a decision may be restored by the court.

From the case materials it follows that the default judgment in the case was made on August 17, 2018, and sent to the MARSH HOA on the same day to the state registration address of the defendant. On August 31, 2018, a registered letter with a copy of the default judgment was returned to the Leninsky District Court of Yaroslavl due to the expiration of the storage period.

At the same time, in the present case, the arguments of the representative of the MARSH HOA that in fact the court decision in absentia was received by the defendant’s representative only on September 20, 2018 are worthy of attention. In order to exercise her rights to appeal, on September 27, 2018, the representative of the MARSH HOA appealed to the court with an application to restore the deadline for filing an application to cancel the absentee decision of the Leninsky District Court of Yaroslavl dated August 13, 2018, which was denied in accordance with the ruling of the Leninsky District Court of Yaroslavl dated October 10, 2018, entered into force on November 12, 2018

After the ruling of the Yaroslavl Regional Court dated November 12, 2021 entered into legal force, within a month, namely November 28, 2021, Kutimova T.A. an application was submitted to restore the missed deadline for filing an appeal, submitted by a representative of the MARSH HOA on November 28, 2018, that is, within a month from the date of adoption of the appeal ruling dated November 12, 2018, which upheld the ruling of the Leninsky District Court of Yaroslavl on the refusal to restore the deadline for filing an application to cancel the default judgment.

Thus, the judicial panel comes to the conclusion that until November 28, 2018, the representative of the MARCH HOA exercised the right to appeal the absentee decision of the Leninsky District Court of Yaroslavl in another way, by filing an application to cancel the absentee decision, appealing the refusal to restore the deadline for submission of the said application. In view of the fact that the application to restore the period for appealing the court decision in absentia was filed within a month from the date of entry into force of the court’s ruling refusing to restore the period for filing an application to cancel the decision in absentia, the judicial panel considers it possible to restore the period for appealing, considering it missed for a good reason.

Based on the above, the court's decision to refuse to restore the time limit for filing an appeal is subject to cancellation, the issue is to be considered on the merits, and the procedural time limit is subject to restoration.

Guided by Art. 334 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, judicial panel

DEFINED:

The ruling of the Leninsky District Court of Yaroslavl dated December 19, 2018 is cancelled.

Resolve the issue on its merits.

Satisfy the application of the representative of the MARCH HOA, T.A. Kutimova. on restoring the deadline for filing an appeal against the absentee decision of the Leninsky District Court of Yaroslavl dated August 13, 2018.

The case materials should be sent to the court of first instance to fulfill the requirements of Article 325 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation.

Presiding

Judges

Objection to cancellation of default judgment

The parties to the process can file an objection to the cancellation of the default judgment if they correctly explain to the court what their explanations consist of. The court will need to be convinced that the plaintiff or defendant did not have valid reasons for canceling the default judgment, and if there were, they were not supported by anything.

Speaking frankly, the parties to the proceeding, when objecting, refer to facts that, in total, form a not very stable relationship. The parties do not have convincing arguments to object. This is done to delay the process, which will end one way or another. Therefore, the tightening procedure does not make sense. The court has already made certain conclusions and in the absence of other evidence, the court's opinion will not change. With rare exceptions, the judge may change his decision, but such situations when the process is delayed are rare.

When drawing up an objection, it is necessary to approach this process competently and convincingly. You need to seek help from a highly qualified lawyer who can build an ideal objection model. Correctly interpreting the provisions of the law that will affect the consideration of the case is an important procedure.

The law office “Katsailidi and Partners” successfully handles such cases; our lawyers can assess the complexity of this process and suggest the points you need. Consultation from specialists will help you quickly deal with the current problem.

Refusal to cancel a default judgment

The court may refuse to cancel a default judgment due to the fact that the parties were notified of the place and time of the court hearing in the required form and the court has the fact that the parties received a summons, and one of the parties did not appear in the proceeding. Since the court warns the parties in advance about the place and time of the court hearing, it can be difficult to prove the presence of valid reasons for absence from the hearing.

Moreover, without the proper documentation for a valid reason, the refusal to set aside a default judgment is not even considered by the court.

The court issues a ruling refusing to cancel the default judgment; this ruling can be appealed on appeal. And on the basis of the appeal, the court will again consider all the circumstances and come to the conclusion of refusing the complaint or making a decision from a higher authority to cancel the default decision.

Article 237 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation. Appealing a court decision in absentia (current version)

For example, an absentee decision was made in final form on April 1, received by the defendant on April 25, and on April 27 an application was filed with the court of first instance to cancel the absentee decision due to the defendant’s absence from the court hearing for a good reason. The consideration of this application ended on May 20, when the court decided to refuse to cancel the default judgment, since the court did not recognize the reason for the defendant’s absence at the court hearing as valid. The period for filing an appeal against such a decision in absentia begins on May 21 and ends on June 20.

5. In part 2 of Art. 237 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, among the subjects of appeal against a decision in absentia, only the parties are indicated, which include the plaintiff and the defendant. At the same time, it seems that the mention in Part 2 of Art. 237 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, only the parties were allowed by the legislator solely to contrast the appeal procedures provided for in Part 1 of Art. 237 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation (the subject of the appeal is the defendant) and Part 2 of Art. 237 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation (subjects of appeal are other participants in the process).

In accordance with parts 2 and 3 of Art. 320 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the right to appeal a court decision belongs to the parties and other persons participating in the case. The right to bring an appeal belongs to the prosecutor participating in the case. Persons who were not involved in the case and whose rights and obligations were resolved by the court also have the right to file an appeal.

The grounds for the conclusion that the circle of persons who have the right to appeal a court decision in absentia have been narrowed in comparison with those defined in Art. 320 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, is not available, since the right to appeal a court decision to a court of second instance refers to the fundamental procedural rights of the persons participating in the case. In this case, what is seen is not the relationship between general and special norms, but a conflict of norms of equal legal force contained in Part 2 of Art. 237 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation and Parts 2, 3 Art. 320 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, which should be resolved in favor of the rules set out in Art. 320 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation.

Consequently, an appeal against a decision in absentia can be filed by the plaintiff, the defendant, third parties, other persons participating in the case, as well as persons who were not involved in the case and the question of whose rights and obligations were resolved by the court, and the appeal a court decision in absentia may be brought by the prosecutor participating in the case or by the prosecutor who was supposed to participate in the case due to the requirements of the law.

In accordance with the explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation within the meaning of the provisions of Art. 34, 35 and 45 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the prosecutor participating in the case is the prosecutor who has applied to the court of first instance with a statement in defense of the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of other persons or has entered into the process to give an opinion on cases in which his participation is provided for by the Code of Civil Procedure Russian Federation and other federal laws; the prosecutor has the right to bring an appeal presentation regardless of his personal presence at the court hearing of the first instance court; The prosecutor has the right to bring an appeal also if he was not invited by the court of first instance to participate in a case in which his participation is mandatory by law (clause 3 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated June 19, 2012 No. 13 “ On the application by courts of the norms of civil procedural legislation regulating proceedings in the court of appeal").

The prosecutor has the same powers in cases in which decisions were made in absentia. For example, if the court made a decision in absentia in a case of eviction from a residential premises, and the prosecutor was not involved in the case, the prosecutor has the right to file an appeal against such a decision in absentia within the time limits established by Part 2 of Art. 237 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation.

6. The deadline for filing an application to cancel a default judgment by the court of first instance and an appeal missed for a good reason may be restored according to the general rules established by Art. 112 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation.

When resolving petitions to restore the procedural deadline for filing an application to cancel a default judgment by the court of first instance or the procedural deadline for filing an appeal, the courts take into account the explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, set out in paragraph 8 of Resolution No. 13 of June 19, 2012.

For persons participating in the case, valid reasons for missing the specified deadline may include, in particular:

- circumstances related to the personality of the person filing the appeal (serious illness, helpless state, illiteracy, etc.);

- receipt by a person who was not present at the court hearing in which the trial of the case ended, a copy of the court decision after the expiration of the appeal period or when the time remaining before the expiration of this period is clearly not enough to familiarize himself with the case materials and draw up a reasoned appeal or presentation;

- failure to explain by the court of first instance in violation of the requirements of Art. 193 and part 5 of Art. 198 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation for the procedure and time limit for appealing a court decision;

- non-compliance by the court with the established Art. 199 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the period for which the drawing up of a reasoned court decision may be postponed, or established by Art. 214 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the deadline for sending a copy of the court decision to persons participating in the case, but not present at the court hearing in which the proceedings of the case ended, if such violations led to the impossibility of preparing and filing a reasoned appeal or presentation within the time limit established for this.

When deciding on the restoration of the period of appeal for persons who were not involved in the case, whose rights and obligations were decided by the court, the courts of first instance should take into account the timeliness of such persons filing an application (petition) for the restoration of the specified period, which is determined based on the terms , established by Art. 321, 332 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation and counted from the moment when they learned or should have learned about the violation of their rights and (or) the imposition of obligations on them by the appealed court decision.

If the prosecutor misses the deadline for filing an appeal, the person in whose interests the prosecutor filed an application to the court of first instance does not deprive the person of the right to independently file an application (petition) to restore the deadline for filing an appeal.

Circumstances such as the presence of a representative of the organization on a business trip or vacation, a change in the head of the organization or his presence on a business trip or vacation, the absence of a lawyer on the staff of the organization, etc. cannot be considered as valid reasons for a legal entity to miss the deadline for an appeal.

For example, in one of the cases, an erroneous application to the court with a private complaint against a ruling refusing to cancel a decision in absentia was recognized as a valid reason for missing the deadline for an appeal.

Example: by absentee decision of the magistrate of judicial district No. 118 of the Central Judicial District of Togliatti, Samara Region dated September 5, 2014 with S.G. in favor of SNT “Lopatino”, arrears of contributions, penalties, and legal costs were recovered.

By the ruling of the magistrate dated January 18, 2021, in satisfaction of the application of S.G. the cancellation of the default judgment was refused.

By the ruling of the magistrate dated March 28, 2021, S.G. the request to restore the missed deadline for filing an appeal against the default judgment was refused, the appeal was returned. By the appeal ruling of the Central District Court of Tolyatti dated May 3, 2017, the ruling of the magistrate dated March 28, 2021 was left unchanged.

The Presidium of the Samara Regional Court overturned the ruling of the magistrate and the appeal ruling of the district court, recognizing that the deadline for filing an appeal against the decision in absentia had been missed for a good reason.

When canceling the court decisions, the presidium pointed out that by the ruling of the magistrate dated January 18, 2021, the statement of S.G. the cancellation of the default judgment dated September 5, 2014 was left unsatisfied, therefore, taking into account the provisions of Part 2 of Art. 237 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the appeal was to be filed no later than February 18, 2021.

On January 25, 2021, the defendant filed a private complaint against the ruling of the magistrate dated January 18, 2021, which the magistrate sent to the Central District Court of Tolyatti along with the case for consideration. The specified private complaint was accepted for proceedings by the court of appeal, its consideration is scheduled for February 28, 2021. Due to the failure of the parties to appear at the court hearing, the hearing of the case was postponed to March 20, 2021. By the decision of the court of appeal dated March 20, 2021, private complaint C .G. left without consideration on the merits on the grounds that the possibility of appealing the ruling of January 18, 2017 by appeal is not provided for by the rules of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation. An appeal with a request to restore the procedural period was filed by S.G. March 28, 2021

Having assessed the above circumstances, the cassation court found that S.G. missed the procedural deadline for filing an appeal for good reasons, the above circumstances objectively excluded the possibility of filing an appeal by S.G. appeal within the period established by law.

In this regard, the presidium of the regional court canceled the ruling of the magistrate and the appeal ruling of the district court and granted the defendant’s request to restore the missed procedural deadline (see Resolution of the Presidium of the Samara Regional Court dated June 29, 2021 in case No. 44g-67/2017).

7. The possibility of restoring the deadline for filing an application to cancel a decision in absentia by the court of first instance is limited by established judicial practice in connection with the position expressed by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation: if it is established that a copy of the decision in absentia was served on the defendant after the expiration of the period for filing an application for its cancellation, but before the expiration of the period for filing an appeal against this decision, the period for filing such an application can be restored by the court, provided that the application for restoration of this period is filed within the period for appeal (Review of judicial practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 2 (2015) , approved by the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on June 26, 2015).

Thus, regardless of the reason for missing the deadline for filing an application to cancel a default judgment, including if such a reason is a delay in delivering a copy of the default judgment to the defendant, the deadline cannot be restored when filing an application after the expiration of the appeal period. The interpretation of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation actually comes down to recognizing the pretrial period for filing an application to cancel a default judgment in the manner established by Part 1 of Art. 237 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation. The deadline for filing an application to cancel a default judgment by the court of first instance is limited by the period of appeal and cannot be restored beyond the specified limits.

In the legal literature, the idea of ​​recognizing the deadline for filing an application to cancel a default judgment as preemptive is also expressed. So, G.L. Osokina writes that “in order to avoid confusion when the persons involved in the case exercise the right to appeal a decision in absentia, unreasonable delay of the trial, as well as violation of the procedural parity of the defendant and other persons participating in the case as a result of the defendant’s attempt to re-exercise his preferential right to appeal a decision in absentia in a special (exclusive) manner, a seven-day period should be regarded as preclusive and, therefore, not subject to restoration according to the rules of Art. 112 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation".

———————————

See: Osokina G.L. Civil process. A special part. M., 2007. P. 325.

8. If there are good reasons for missing the deadline for appealing a decision in absentia, related to the untimely delivery of a copy of the decision in absentia to the defendant, the defendant may have the deadline for filing an appeal restored without first considering the application to cancel the decision in absentia by the court of first instance.

Example: by absentee decision of the Serpukhov City Court of the Moscow Region dated October 28, 2015, S.’s claim was partially satisfied.

On February 11, 2021, the defendant submitted an appeal to the court of first instance, as well as a petition to restore the deadline for filing an appeal, since the court decision was received by him outside the appeal period of February 1, 2021.

By a court ruling dated March 21, 2021, the defendant was denied the restoration of the deadline for filing an appeal, and the appeal was returned to the defendant.

The appellate court overturned the district court's ruling, the reason for missing the deadline for filing an appeal was recognized as valid, and the deadline for filing an appeal against the default judgment was restored.

At the same time, the court took into account that the final absentee decision was made on November 5, 2015, that is, the court did not comply with the established Art. 199 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation is a five-day period for which the drawing up of a reasoned court decision may be postponed.

The accompanying document dated November 5, 2015 states that the court’s decision in absentia was sent to the defendant on November 5, 2015. However, the case contains an accompanying letter dated December 30, 2015, which indicates that a decision in absentia was sent to the defendant, which was received by the defendant on February 1, 2021.

After this, on February 3, 2021, the defendant sent an appeal and a petition to restore the deadline for filing an appeal.

Due to conflicting information regarding sending the defendant a copy of the court decision in absentia, as well as the lack of reliable information about the defendant receiving a copy of the court decision in absentia earlier than February 1, 2021 by the court of appeal, the reason for missing the deadline for filing an appeal was recognized as valid (see the Appeal ruling of the Moscow Regional Court dated July 25, 2021 in case No. 33-20143/2016).

Procedure for canceling a default judgment

What to do when a default judgment has been made, and the defendant wanted to come and defend his rights, but for objective reasons was unable to appear in court? In this case, in order to maintain adversarial rights and equality of the parties, the law establishes the institution of canceling a default judgment.

Our lawyer will also help you in the procedure for appealing a court decision, even if your case was not heard in absentia.

• After the procedure for canceling the default judgment, the proceedings begin anew.
• After submitting the application, it is important to track the date and time of its consideration. Consideration of such an application in court provides an opportunity for the defendant to support the arguments presented, bring new ones, and refute the plaintiff’s arguments in the case.

Deadline for filing an application to cancel a default judgment

To cancel a default judgment, you must submit an appropriate application indicating the validity of the reason for not appearing in court, as well as presenting facts and evidence that will affect the court decision. It is the combination of two grounds that influences the positive decision on the application to cancel the default judgment.

Such an application is submitted to the court that made the decision in writing within seven days after receiving the decision. If this deadline is missed, it can be restored. Do not forget to attach to the application copies of it according to the number of participants in the process, as well as copies of the documents on which your demands and objections regarding the judicial act are based. Our organization has a permanent promotion to fill out an application.

The positive side of canceling a decision is the guarantor of a comprehensive and complete resolution of the dispute, which will be facilitated by filing a counterclaim, presenting new evidence, and involving parties interested in the outcome of the case. If the case is reviewed on appeal, this will become unacceptable, and therefore, we always recommend that our clients who apply for legal assistance try to overturn the default judgment, and then, if this fails, use the appeal procedure for appealing the judicial act.

How a court decision is made in absentia - procedure and deadlines

• Most likely, before going to court, the plaintiff will try to send you a claim demanding that you pay off the debt voluntarily. If you don't respond or try to reach an agreement, the plaintiff may take the case to court.
• The plaintiff files a claim in court. Most often this is the court at your place of residence, but there may be another court, for example, if so provided for by the terms of your contract (this is called contractual jurisdiction).
• The judge appoints the case for consideration and sends the plaintiff, you (the defendant) and other participants in the process a summons with the date of the hearing. The defendant is also sent the text of the statement of claim with attachments.
• At the beginning of the court session, the appearance of the parties and their notice are checked. If there is no proper notice to the defendant, the case will be adjourned and you will be issued a summons again. If the case materials contain confirmation of receipt of the summons by the defendant (mail notification or an envelope with a summons that you did not receive, returned after the expiration of the storage period), you did not come to the hearing and did not ask to postpone the case for valid reasons or to consider the case without you, the judge invites the plaintiff to consider the case in absentia.
• At the end of the court hearing, the judge makes a decision in absentia. It will be sent to you by registered mail with acknowledgment of receipt within 3 days (the deadline is not always observed in practice; it may be sent later).
• You have 7 days from the date of receipt of the default judgment to file an application to the same court to have it set aside. After these 7 days, the total period for appealing the decision to a higher court begins - 1 month.
• If the defendant files an application to cancel the default judgment, the judge schedules a hearing and summons the parties to it. As a result, the judge refuses to cancel the default judgment or cancels it and begins to consider the case anew. At the end of the new hearing, a regular (not default) decision is made.
• If the defendant does not react in any way to the sent absentee decision, the court counts 7 days + 1 month from the date of receipt of the decision. When this period expires, the decision comes into force, and the plaintiff is issued a writ of execution.
• Writs of execution are most often presented to the Federal Bailiff Service. The bailiffs initiate enforcement proceedings and send the debtor a resolution. Usually it is at this stage that you will learn about the existence of a court decision.

What happens after the default judgment is cancelled?

The procedure after reversing a default judgment is as follows:

1. The court resumes consideration of the case on the merits . Now is the time for you to provide evidence, give explanations, and justify your position in all legal ways.
2. A decision in absentia will not be issued again . The most important thing here is this: if this time the defendant does not appear at the trial, then the court’s decision upon a new consideration of this case will no longer be a decision in absentia. And in this case, the defendant will no longer be able to once again apply for a review of this decision in absentia proceedings.