What is a court order?

A court ruling in Russia has several meanings. A judicial decision refers to almost all acts adopted by the courts (except for the final decision in a civil case and the verdict in a criminal case). In addition, a resolution is a type of judicial act, depending on the process in which they are adopted: civil, arbitration or criminal. Special decisions are made by the Supreme Court (SC), clarifying controversial issues of application of laws.

In most cases, court orders can be appealed if you do not agree with them. But each type of resolution has its own deadlines and rules that are mandatory for the complaint to be accepted. It is not so easy to understand them right away. It is quite possible to file a claim yourself, but it is better to entrust the appeal to a professional lawyer.

What are court decisions?

Different legal processes are governed by their own codes, each of which refers to the decision as an act of the court. But in my own interpretation.

In the Civil Procedural Code (CCP), this is a generic concept for all verdicts; in the Arbitration Procedural Code (APC), decisions are made only by appeal and cassation courts.

Types of resolutions in the Code of Civil Procedure

The Civil Procedure Code names 4 types of court decisions:

Order - issued under certain conditions without opening court proceedings. For example, this is how you can recover money (up to 500 thousand rubles) or take away movable property (of the same value). This is both a verdict and an executive document at the same time.
Judgment is the final verdict rendered by the first instance. Such a court document provides an answer to the essence of the case: whether the claim is satisfied or denied, the rights of the plaintiff (or defendant) are protected, etc.
The definition does not concern the essence of the matter; it can be adopted during the process to resolve intermediate issues or appoint examinations. There can be several definitions, unlike a solution.
A resolution of a supervisory authority is a judicial act based on the results of an appeal.

All these court decisions are binding on everyone who participated in the process, including government agencies and municipalities. Failure to comply with them is regarded as contempt of court.

Arbitration ruling

In processes between legal entities, this act formalizes the revision of arbitration verdicts. That is, decisions are made only by appeal, cassation or supervisory courts.

The arbitration courts themselves issue only decisions and rulings. Or, in cases specifically specified by law, orders.

What is called a ruling in criminal proceedings?

In the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC), a judicial decision is any (except for a sentence) interim decision in a case if it is conducted by one judge. If there are several of them, determinations are made during the proceedings.

In addition, the Code of Criminal Procedure refers to the decision of the judicial presidium when reviewing sentences, rulings and other decisions. And also - the decision of the investigator, prosecutor, inquiry officer, etc., which were made during pre-trial proceedings.

Supreme Court ruling

The judicial decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court differ from the others because they do not resolve a specific case on the merits, but provide an interpretation of legal norms. In other words, the Supreme Court explains to all other courts (except the Constitutional Court) how to apply certain articles of laws.

Such decisions summarize judicial practice, usually in similar cases. Sometimes they interpret concepts that are mentioned in legislation, but without explanation.

Explanations can also be given regarding criminal proceedings (for example, on issues of corpus delicti). Acts like these from the Supreme Court help ensure uniform application of laws.

Subtle matters of the concept of “essential answer”

The “intuitively obvious” but not formalized content of the term “RESPONSE ON THE ESSENTIALS” opens up a wide avenue for speculation in official responses and judicial acts on claims in which an attempt is made to challenge the “answer on the merits.” At the same time, one gets the impression that such speculations have turned from randomly found tricks into proven “standard” tools. It would be interesting to hear opinions that would confirm or refute such a hypothesis, which can be put forward by the similarity of two cases from judicial practice. One of them concerns a claim against the city administration in the south of our country to declare illegal the refusal to form a land plot for an apartment building and to force it to take certain actions. In the judicial act in this case, many laws and regulations were cited that protect the rights of citizens in, but the final part of the reasoning part of the judicial act stated that (QUOTE) “At the same time, the court found that the response of the Administration of the city of Feodosia, drawn up in a letter from the DD .MM.YYYY No. is explanatory in nature, adopted in accordance with the current legislation of the Russian Federation, within the powers granted to the administrative defendant and the administrative defendant did not make a final decision on this application. In addition, during the trial, the administrative plaintiff did not provide evidence of a violation of his rights and the rights of the co-owners of the apartment building, including FULL NAME4, whose statements are attached... The court cannot take into account the argument of the administrative plaintiff about the need to use the decision made when considering this administrative case The Arbitration Court of the Republic of Crimea dated DD.MM.YYYY, in the opinion of the plaintiff, is of a similar nature, since the specified decision does not have prejudicial significance for the consideration of this case.”

Bearing in mind this practice, already in another region, the co-owner of a house, which is in shared ownership of several co-owners, appealed to the Administration of the city with the DEMAND “TO TAKE THE NECESSARY EVENTS to return the land plot to municipal ownership and measures to form the boundaries of the plot of the house, taking into account the need for a passage from the street to the front part of the house, with the definition of the boundaries of the site and the provision of documents to the cadastral chamber, with the simultaneous delivery of copies of documents to the applicant.” THE CIRCUMSTANCES that led to the filing of such an application are not so important for the topic of this post. However, to complete the picture, they can be mentioned, especially since they are not too ordinary: Some of the co-owners of the house, using the technologies described in the materials “Lands and land plots as objects. Again the age-old question, which came first - the chicken or the egg”; The hidden legalization of unauthorized buildings through a claim for recognition of ownership rights resulted in as many as 4 plots of a house in shared ownership being registered in the cadastral register, and personal ownership rights were registered for three of them. The total area of land plots registered in the cadastral register was more than 1.5 times greater than the initial land allotment for building a house in the 20s of the last century and the results of Soviet-era land surveys in the 70s and 80s. At the same time, by a resolution of 1994, the Administration of the village, where the house was located at that time, refused to issue certificates of land ownership to the co-owners of the residential building, and in 2011, by a decision of the court of the city, which the village later became part of, it was established that the common plot in the case of a house, the house was not transferred into shared ownership to the co-owners, and its boundaries were not defined in accordance with federal legislation. In 2018, the information of the Unified State Register was updated regarding the indication of the area, the copyright holder of one of the registered plots, which was recognized as the original (previous) property in relation to three other plots, two of which continued to be listed in the Unified State Register as personal property rights of specific co-owners.

IN RESPONSE TO THE APPLICATION, the requirements of which are given verbatim above, the following response from the Administration was received:

THE APPLICANT AGAIN APPEALED TO THE ADMINISTRATION with the same demand, explaining in a new application that the previously received letter from the Administration (QUOTE) “does not contain a substantive response to the application from .... Instead in the answer

information from the Unified State Register of Real Estate about plots at the address... has been duplicated. (this information is known to the applicant and is provided in the application dated .... 2019 with a detailed analysis of the situation);
the powers of the Federal Service for State Registration, Cadastre and Cartography are explained (these powers are known to the applicant from Law No. 218-FZ “On State Registration of Real Estate”);
it was reported that local government bodies do not have the authority to enter information into the Unified State Register of Real Estate, although the applicant did not ask the Administration of the city ... to enter information into the Unified State Register of Real Estate.

In a statement from... with reference to the laws of the Russian Federation, judicial acts and resolutions that are well known to the Administration of the city..., namely

Resolution No.... .....1994 Administration....;
solution …. City Court dated... 2011 in case No....;
Resolution of April 29, 2010 No. 10/22 of the Plenums of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation;
Federal Law of December 29, 2004 No. 189-FZ “On the implementation of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation”;
Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation No. 12-P dated May 28, 2010;
SP 42.13330.2011 (SNiP 2.07.01-89* “Urban planning. Planning and development of urban and rural settlements”)

a demand was expressed to carry out the necessary measures to form the boundaries of the site at the house at the address .... taking into account the need for a passage from the street…. to the front part of the house, defining the boundaries of the site and providing the necessary documents to the Registrar, while simultaneously handing over copies of the documents to the applicant.

In connection with the above, I ASK YOU to provide an answer on the merits of the questions raised in the statement dated...”

IN RESPONSE TO THE SECOND APPEAL, the applicant received a response from the Administration, which actually repeated the text of the previous response, and which still did not contain an answer about the content of the Administration’s decision to satisfy the applicant’s request to form a plot at the house at the address .... or the refusal of the applicant to satisfy this requirement. In connection with this, A LAWSUIT WAS FILED in the city court with the demand: “To oblige the Administration of the city ... to give a substantive answer, justified by references to legislative and regulatory acts, on the satisfaction of the applicant’s request for the Administration of the city ... to form a common plot of land at the house at the address ... , or about the refusal to satisfy the applicant’s request for the formation by the Administration of the city ... of a common land plot at the house at the address ....”

THE ADMINISTRATION OBJECTED to the satisfaction of the claim and, as arguments, cited in particular the following considerations:

Thus, the Administration, IMHO, actually admitted that its response contained only some clarifications; there was no operative part with consent or refusal to satisfy the applicant’s demands. It is appropriate to note that in the Administration’s objections to the claim, the operative part demanding refusal to satisfy the claims was formulated very clearly both from the point of view of the style of the text of the objections and from the point of view of design - a separate “cap” and an explicit request for refusal.

In his comments to the Administration’s objections, the PLAINTIFF NOTED THIS CIRCUMSTANCE: (I QUOTE) “Judging by the form of response from the Administration representative, officials of the Administration of the city ... are aware of the requirements for the form of a substantive response to the applicant’s demands. The substantive response to the applicant’s requirements contains a description of the stated requirements, in a volume sufficient to understand their essence, a operative part from which one can draw unambiguous conclusions about the decision made (satisfaction of the requirements, partial satisfaction of the requirements, complete refusal to satisfy the requirements), as well as a motivation part indicating the motives and norms of laws and other regulatory documents that provide the basis for making the decision formulated in the operative part of the answer on the merits.” The plaintiff also explained that (I QUOTE) “IN VIOLATION OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLES 5; 10 Federal Law No. 59-FZ letter from the Property Management Committee of the Administration of the city....

did not contain any operative part that would make it possible to unambiguously understand what decision was made by the Administration of the city... in connection with the applicant’s demands;
did not contain any assessments of the circumstances and norms of law to which the applicant relied or indications that the circumstances to which the applicant referred were incorrect, and the norms of law to which the applicant referred were inapplicable to these circumstances.

The letter from ... No. ... was, in form and content, a compilation certificate containing publicly available information (information from the Unified State Register of Real Estate about sites at the address ... and information about the powers of the Federal Service for State Registration, Cadastre and Cartography, known from Law No. 218-FZ “On State registration of real estate"), as well as a message that local government bodies do not have the authority to enter information into the Unified State Register, although the applicant did not demand that the Administration of the city ... personally enter information into the Unified State Register.”

In connection with the circumstances of the receipt of the second response by the plaintiff, it was also noted that (QUOTE) “Unlike the first letter ... signed by the chairman of the Property Management Committee of the Administration of the city ..., whose powers in terms of resolving issues related to the property of the city ... , and the signing of answers on property issues, there is practically no doubt, the second letter ... was signed by the deputy. the head of the affairs department of the Administration of the city ..., whose powers and qualifications to resolve issues related to the property of the city ..., and signing answers on property issues, are not obvious.

The circumstances surrounding the signing of the second letter ... violate the instructions of Article 10 of Federal Law No. 59-FZ, namely

Article 10. Consideration of the appeal

1. A state body, local government body or official: ... 5) notifies the citizen about sending his appeal for consideration to another state body, local government body or other official in accordance with their competence.

The circumstances associated with the signing of the letter ... violate the rights of the plaintiff enshrined in Article 5 of Federal Law No. 59-FZ, namely Article 5. Rights of a citizen when considering an appeal When considering an appeal by a state body, local government body or official, a citizen has the right to: 3) receive ... notification of forwarding a written appeal ... to an official whose competence includes resolving the issues raised in the appeal;

The given arguments and norms of the Federal Law “On the procedure for considering appeals from citizens of the Russian Federation” dated May 2, 2006 No. 59-FZ indicate that the attempts of the Administration representative to argue for violations of the instructions of Article 5 are unfounded; 10 Federal Law No. 59-FZ and related violations of the plaintiff’s rights prescribed in Federal Law No. 59-FZ, with references to the rules of law of land and housing legislation given in the representative’s response submitted to the plaintiff on November 5, 2021.”

It is appropriate to explain here that ALREADY IN ITS OBJECTIONS TO THE CLAIM, the Administration presented two pages of references to laws that, in its opinion, describe the current situation with the registration of the plots of the house themselves and the registration of rights to some of them. These arguments could be argued in a lawsuit challenging the Administration’s refusal to form the site. BUT SUCH REFUSAL OBVIOUSLY WAS NOT SOUND IN THE ABOVE RESPONSE OF THE ADMINISTRATION!

And this particular lawsuit specifically challenged the Administration’s attempt to evade an explicit expression of refusal. Well, or admitting that you were wrong and the actions of “unidentified persons” contrary to the interests of the service and the instructions of the law. ☺

However, the court sided with the Administration!?

Here is the wording of the reasons for the refusal in a 4-page decision, 3 pages of which were filled with copies of the statement of claim and the Administration’s objections.

At the same time, the plaintiff’s comments to the Administration’s objections WERE NOT INCLUDED in the text of this “copy-paste,” just as the MENTION OF SUCH COMMENTS WAS EXCLUDED from the minutes of the court hearing. In response to comments on the record in connection with such discrimination, the comments WERE REJECTED with the remarkable wording: “Having compared the written comments submitted with the record of the hearing dated ... the court finds that the record of the hearing is complete and reliable.”

Such an approach to the analysis of comments on the protocol does not allow one to be surprised by the decision of the city court on the claim as a whole. Something else is surprising!

An appeal to the Moscow Regional Court upheld this decision, as did the Saratov cassation court. But the traditions of the Moscow Regional Court in this case can also be considered consistent. And here are some excerpts from the judicial act of the young SARATOV CASSATION (I QUOTE) “Having heard the report of the judge of the First Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction Vaslyaev V.S., the judicial panel for administrative cases of the First Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction found: F .AND ABOUT. filed an administrative claim in court, in which he asked to assign responsibility to the administration.... give a substantive answer, with references to legislative and regulatory acts, regarding the satisfaction or refusal of his application for the formation of a common land plot at the house located at the address; <address>. By resolution of the village administration... it was refused to issue certificates of land ownership to the co-owners of the mentioned residential building. However, in 2006 and subsequently, land plots were formed under the said household, which were registered in the cadastral register and the ownership rights were registered. With the indicated household, there are four land plots, with cadastral numbers.... The common land plot, with cadastral number ..., is the land plot under the house at the address: <address> has not been formed and has no boundaries established in accordance with federal legislation. These circumstances were confirmed by the decision of ... the city court ..., which established that the named common land plot at the house has an area of about 2500 sq.m., the plot was not transferred into shared ownership to the co-owners of the house, and its boundaries are not defined in accordance with federal legislation. He believed that if the land plot is not formed, the land under the house is owned by the corresponding public legal entity, and therefore the registration of 4 land plots for a house that is in shared ownership of several co-owners contradicts the basic principles of land legislation of the Russian Federation. ... In the cassation appeal, .. Full name. asks to cancel the judicial acts, citing a significant violation of substantive law, returning the administrative case for a new consideration. Indicates that the disputed responses to his appeals did not resolve the questions he raised.”

Let me make a small comment here:

IS IT POSSIBLE TO SEE IN THE CASSATION COMPLAINT THAT THE PLAINTIFF “Indicates that the disputed answers to his appeals did not resolve the questions he raised?” ?

IN FACT, in the cassation appeal, the PLAINTIFF DIRECTLY INDICATES: (I QUOTE) “In response to the appeal... of 2021, the applicant received a letter from the Administration... (a copy is available on file), which

did not contain any operative part that would make it possible to unambiguously understand what decision on the merits of the applicant’s demands was made by the Administration of the city of Balashikha; ... The form and content of the letters ... violate the instructions of Article 10 of Federal Law No. 59-FZ, namely ... The form and content of the letters violate the rights of the plaintiff enshrined in Article 5 of Federal Law No. 59-FZ, namely ... Circumstances associated with the signing of letter No. 1-6x -21804/9 dated August 16, 2019 violate the instructions of Article 10 of Federal Law No. 59-FZ, namely ... "

Does the plaintiff’s claim contain a complaint that “the disputed answers to his appeals did not resolve the questions raised by him” with such wording of the cassation appeal and IN THE PRESENCE OF THE TEXT OF THE CLAIM ITSELF WITH THE DEMAND: (QUOTE) “Oblige the Administration of the city ... to give a substantive response based on references to legislative and regulatory acts on the satisfaction of the applicant’s request for the formation by the Administration of the city ... of a common land plot at the house at the address ..., or on the refusal to satisfy the applicant’s request for the formation by the Administration of the city ... of a common land plot at the house at address ... .”,

and also if there are WRITTEN COMMENTS in the case to the objections of the Administration, DUPLICATED in the REMARKS on the minutes of the court session (albeit not formally accepted, but attached to the case), which states that (QUOTE) “... The plaintiff draws the court’s attention to the fact that the the claim is NOT RELATED TO THE DEMAND FOR PROTECTION OF RIGHTS IN CONNECTION WITH VIOLATION OF Substantive LAW, the claim in question is NOT RELATED TO THE OBLIGATION OF THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE G/O... TO FULFILL THE REQUIREMENT OF THE PLAINTIFF, WHICH HE SET FORTH IN HIS APPEAL TO THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE G/o.... The lawsuit under consideration is related to a violation of the rights of the administrative plaintiff to receive a response on the merits, i.e. a reasoned answer, which would also allow one not to speculate on secret meanings and messages in the Administration’s responses, but would contain an unambiguously interpreted decision of the Administration on carrying out or refusing to carry out the formation of the boundaries of the site at the house at the address ... taking into account the requirements of land management, urban planning and other norms and rules."

HOWEVER, the Judicial Collegium for Administrative Cases of the First Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction, agreeing with the conclusions of the courts of first and appellate instances, IGNORES ALL INSTRUCTIONS IN THE CASE MATERIALS that the plaintiff demands an answer that would contain an unambiguously interpreted decision of the Administration to carry out or refuse to carry out formation of site boundaries.

At the same time, the Judicial Collegium for Administrative Cases of the First Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction, nevertheless deciding to penetrate into the jungle of substantive law norms that would be appropriate when considering a claim to restore the rule of law in the situation described in the judicial act of the Saratov court, and agreeing that, that (I QUOTE) “By the resolution of the village administration... it was refused to issue certificates of land ownership to the co-owners of the mentioned residential building. … . The common land plot, with cadastral number ..., is the land plot under the house at the address: <address> has not been formed and has no boundaries established in accordance with federal legislation. These circumstances were confirmed by the decision ... of the city court ..., which established that the named common land plot at the house has an area of about 2500 sq.m., the plot was not transferred into shared ownership to the co-owners of the house, and its boundaries are not defined in accordance with federal legislation.” indicates that (I QUOTE) “The norms of the current legislation do not impose the obligation on the local government body to create land plots that are privately owned.”

But what kind of private property can we talk about in relation to a plot of land that, according to the circumstances just cited and seemingly not refuted by the Saratov judges, was not transferred to the co-owners of the house, but was put on cadastral registration by the Administration? But this is true, by the way.

At the end, the Saratov court also cites CAS arguments: (QUOTE) “In accordance with paragraph 62 of the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated September 27, 2021 No. 36 “On some issues of application by courts of the Code of Administrative Procedure of the Russian Federation,” the court does not verify the feasibility of the disputed decisions, actions (inaction) ... of local government bodies ... carried out by them within the limits of their discretion in accordance with the competence granted by law or other regulatory legal act. (Comment: Noteworthy is the INTERESTING CIRCUMSTANCE THAT the right of “discretion” is already appears not only at the Court, but also at Local Government Bodies!?)

(CONTINUE QUOTE)

“Disagreement with the above responses of the city district administration..., which were made within the competence and powers granted and do not contradict the requirements of the current legislation, cannot serve as a basis for satisfying administrative claims.

Within the meaning of the provisions of Art. 227 of the Code of Administrative Proceedings of the Russian Federation, in order to recognize decisions, actions (inaction) ... of a local government body, ... as illegal, a combination of two conditions must be present - inconsistency of the contested decisions, actions (inaction) with regulatory legal acts and a violation of the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of the administrative plaintiff.

The totality of such conditions has not been established when considering an administrative case.

Taking into account the stated circumstances of the case, the evidence available in the case, the courts of first and appellate instances correctly came to the conclusion that the full name was refused. in meeting the stated requirements."

As we see, judges in Feodosia, the Moscow region and Saratov are unanimous in supporting the substitution by authorities of a “substantive answer” with answers that are “explanatory in nature.”

It is impossible to challenge such answers; they are a collection of quotes from existing laws and “and the administrative defendant did not make a final decision on this application” (remember Feodosia!).

But it is IMPOSSIBLE to receive an ANSWER IN THE ESSENCE, which would allow one not to speculate on secret meanings and messages in the answers, but would contain an unambiguously interpreted solution?

What is written in resolutions and in what form

There are no clearly defined norms in the codes; the content strongly depends on the type of act and what issue is being considered in it. If the court ruling is in the form of a decision, then there will be standard parts: descriptive, motivational and operative. But the structure may be different if the case is not considered on its merits, but, say, an additional examination is appointed.

If the document does not contain a secret that would be protected by law, then it can be issued electronically. Then there must be digital signatures of all the judges who considered the case. In this case, a paper version is also required. Of course, this applies only to civil proceedings, including arbitration.

No matter how the court order is drawn up, you can appeal it if the contents do not suit you. How to do this is described in our separate article.

Sources:

Bindingness of court decisions

Resolution on a case of an administrative offense

Judicial acts of the arbitration court

Court decision in a criminal case

Requirements that a court decision must meet

Requirements for a court decision:

legality and validity (Article 195 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation);
certainty;
unconditionality;
completeness.

Legality and validity of the court decision

A court decision is legal when it

issued in strict compliance with the rules of procedural law and in full compliance with the rules of substantive law that are subject to application to this legal relationship, or
based on the application, where necessary, of an analogy of law or an analogy of law

(Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of December 19, 2003 No. 23 “On the court decision”, Art. 1, 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

Comment

If there are contradictions between the norms of procedural or substantive law to be applied when considering and resolving a given case, then the decision is legal if applied by the court in accordance with Part 2 of Art. 120 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, Part 3, Art. 5 of the Federal Constitutional Law “On the Judicial System of the Russian Federation” and Part 2 of Art. 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the norm that has the greatest legal force.

When establishing contradictions between the rules of law to be applied when considering and resolving a case, the courts also need to take into account the explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, given in Resolutions of October 31, 1995 No. 8 “On some issues of the application by courts of the Constitution of the Russian Federation in the administration of justice” and dated October 10, 2003 No. 5 “On the application by courts of general jurisdiction of generally recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties of the Russian Federation” (clause 2 of the Resolution).

A court decision cannot be recognized as legal if:

the court applied a law that should not be applied;
the court did not apply the law to be applied;
The court misinterpreted the law.

More details

By resolving a dispute on the basis of a law that has lost force or is in conflict with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the court makes a mistake, leading to an illegal decision.

Failure to apply the appropriate law occurs in cases where the court in its decision did not make reference to the norm of substantive law to be applied, and the case was resolved in conflict with the law, or the decision was justified by acts issued by inappropriate authorities or in an inappropriate manner that contradict more normative acts. high legal force. This may also include cases where the court imposes an obligation on a party that is not provided for by law.

Failure to apply the proper law often occurs when the court incorrectly determined the legal relations of the parties and resolved the dispute on the basis of the law governing other legal relations. Thus, when resolving a dispute about the division of property of persons in family relationships without registering a marriage, the court was guided by family law regulating the issues of common joint property of spouses, while the norms of civil law relating to common shared property should be applied. Or the court applied the norms of labor legislation to legal relations arising from a work contract.

Misinterpretation of the law usually occurs in cases where the court mistakenly understood the content of the legal norm governing the disputed legal relationship, which resulted in an incorrect legal qualification of the rights and obligations of the parties to the case.

The decision is justified when the facts relevant to the case are confirmed by evidence examined by the court, satisfying the requirements of the law on their relevance and admissibility, or by circumstances that do not require proof (Articles 55, 59-61, 67 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation), and also when when it contains exhaustive conclusions of the court arising from the established facts (clause 3 of the Resolution).

In other words, such a decision should be considered justified when the court’s conclusions about the factual circumstances of the case correspond to the actual relationship of the parties. A court decision may be considered justified if:

the court will fully determine the range of sought facts that are essential to the case, and will express its judgment on the presence or absence of each of them separately in the decision;
the court's conclusions about the presence or absence of legal facts essential to the resolution of the case will be based on evidence examined at the court hearing.

The court cannot be guided by the data that it received outside the court hearing. This information cannot have procedural significance.

The court's decision must be based on a conclusion that logically follows from all the facts verified, examined and established during the consideration of the case on its merits. If the court, having assessed the evidence, each individually and all together, establishes that certain presented materials, testimony of witnesses, other evidence do not confirm the circumstances to which the parties referred as the basis for their claims or objections, it must convincingly motivate in its decision your conclusion about this.

Certainty of a court decision

The certainty of a court decision means that it must clearly resolve the issue regarding the content of the rights and obligations of the parties in connection with the controversial material legal relationship that is the subject of the court's consideration. The court's decision must contain an answer to who owns the rights, who has the responsibilities, and what their specific content is. This requirement, being fulfilled by the court, entails the reality of execution of the court decision.

The requirement for certainty of a judicial decision is closely related to the fact that alternative decisions cannot be made. It is permissible, however, to make so-called optional decisions, when the court provides for the possibility of replacing one award with another in the event that it may be impossible to execute the first (Article 205 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

Unconditionality of a court decision

The unconditionality of a court decision means that its operative part should not contain indications of the possibility of executing the court decision depending on the occurrence of any conditions. It must be final.

A court decision is unconditional if it clearly and comprehensively sets out the procedure and method of its execution.

The procedure for making a ruling by the court

The court's ruling does not resolve the plaintiff's claims on the merits. Such a document, upon receipt of a party’s request or on the direct instructions of the Civil Procedure Code, is issued by the court or in the deliberation room. Or if the question raised is not complex, without removal directly at the preliminary or main court hearing. The determination is announced immediately.

The definition can be drawn up on a separate paper medium. Or it may simply be entered into the minutes of the court hearing (for example, about the inclusion of some material evidence, etc.). If it is drawn up in writing, then its content must necessarily reflect the name of the court, the persons participating in the case, the date and place of preparation, the subject of the claim, the issue in respect of which the ruling is made, the court’s explanations and a description of the motives that formed the basis for the consideration of the specified the issue and the operative part - how this procedural issue was resolved: “refuse to take interim measures”, etc.

The determination comes into force immediately from the moment of announcement. A document regarding the progress of the claim (termination or suspension of proceedings in the case) must be sent to all persons participating in the consideration of the civil dispute within 3 days after such a decision is made. If they did not participate in the court hearing, having been duly notified (judicial notice).

The concept and content of the legal force of a court decision

Note 1
Legal force is a set of procedural requirements, rules, regulations, norms and mechanisms by which the legal obligation of specific individuals is achieved by their substantive legal status established by the judge in a previously held process.

The concept of “legal force” entered Russian-language legislation and scientific use in the 19th century mainly as a technical term, with the help of which the law indicated decisions that were not subject to appeal in the usual manner. Currently, legal scholars use the term to designate concepts that mediate specific phenomena in the field of civil legislation.

The history of the formation of the institution of legal force shows that it followed the path of finding procedural mechanisms capable of guaranteeing the effect of their decision, since the decision itself, by virtue of its essence alone, could not do this.

Are you an expert in this subject area? We invite you to become the author of the Directory Working Conditions

The Code of Civil Procedure (Article 209) includes provisions governing the entry into force of lawful court decisions. Court decisions come into force after the expiration of the period for appeal to the appellate instance. When filing a complaint, the judge's decision comes into force only after consideration of the complaint. If, by the decision of the appellate court, the decision of the first instance court is changed or canceled, or another, new decision is made, then it immediately comes into force.

After the court decision has entered into legal force, the parties to the process, other entities participating in the case, and their legal successors cannot re-state the same claims or challenge the legal relations and facts established by the court in another court.

The activities of the court provide maximum guarantees for the protection of rights and interests protected by law (compared to other law enforcement bodies), the stability of the material and legal situation established by a court decision. Such protection is provided by various sanctions; it cannot be changed out of court. This danger exists only when re-applying to the court regarding resolved issues, but then the rules of exclusivity and prejudice come into force.

Finished works on a similar topic

Coursework The legal force of a court decision 410 ₽ Abstract The legal force of a court decision 230 ₽ Test work The legal force of a court decision 200 ₽

Receive completed work or specialist advice on your educational project Find out the cost

In court, it is possible to verify the act of almost any judicial body and official, therefore there is no need for prohibitions representing the content of the institution of legal force in relation to these acts.

What is a court clarification?

An explanation of a court decision is a document that clarifies inaccurate language. Its purpose is to eliminate ambiguities and provide a full understanding of the decision to all interested parties. The court's explanation is regulated by the Civil Procedure Code and the Arbitration Procedure Code. Art. 202 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation establishes the very possibility of obtaining an explanation from the court, but does not define it. The law in this case is based on the obvious purpose of the document - to explain the decision in a clearer and more understandable language.

An explanation cannot change the content of the decision made. No information in the document should be ignored. The decision as such remains in force. The explanation of the court decision itself can be considered a commentary that is intended to clarify a number of points. This is confirmed by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in its Resolution No. 23 of 2003.

Legal properties of the legal force of a court decision

The content of legal force is represented by special properties:

irrefutability - the inadmissibility of protesting or appealing a judge’s decision, which has already entered into legal force; due to newly discovered circumstances, a review of the court decision is possible in the order of supervision (in extraordinary circumstances);
exclusivity - the inadmissibility of initiating, prosecuting, or resolving a case based on a repeatedly filed claim that is identical to the original one; no other acts can establish other rules of behavior for the participants in the relationship in comparison with the prescribed norms;
Prejudiciality - challenging in proceedings in another case the facts and legal relations established in court, which are obligatory for the court and other subjects of the process;
mandatory - strict compliance with the decision by all citizens, officials, organizations and bodies; mandatoryness in various forms is characteristic of a court decision and a regulatory legal act;
enforceability - a court decision made by a court is mandatory for execution; some court decisions are subject to immediate execution; In case of failure to comply with a court decision, a compulsory procedure may be applied.

Disputed relations are regulated by the court through the enforcement of law. The court cannot regulate such relations by applying different rules of law to them, which indicates their exclusivity. Enforceability makes it possible to actually protect the disputed and violated rights and interests of participants in a controversial legal relationship. There is a close connection between exclusivity and prejudice. Prejudice is a manifestation, a consequence of exclusivity, is similar to it and is part of its content.

A court decision has an impact on the substantive legal sphere; it cannot automatically affect the procedural rights and obligations of participants in a possible process. Exclusivity and prejudiciality are the means by which the obligation of the relevant persons by the substantive legal situation established by the court is achieved by influencing their procedural rights and obligations.

Legal force is an institution that functions only in the sphere of legal proceedings, therefore the effects of exclusivity and prejudiciality cannot exist outside its framework, as well as in relation to non-judicial acts.

Conditions for obtaining clarification from the court

An explanation can be obtained from the court in which the trial was held. The question of the need for clarification must be raised at the court hearing. In this case, the absence of participants in the case at the meeting will not be an obstacle to considering the issue of clarification from the court.

According to Art. 202 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, an explanation of the decision can only be obtained if two key conditions are met: the decision has not yet been executed and the period for compulsory execution has not yet expired.

Procedure for obtaining clarification

The specific procedure for obtaining clarification of a court decision is as follows:

Filing an application to the court.
Scheduling a court hearing.
Notification of all participants in the case.
Issue of clarification.

The legislation does not establish a specific deadline for the entire clarification procedure. The general rule used is that the court must explain its own decision within 1 month.

Explanations are made by application. The participant in the trial must draw up a statement and submit it to the court either during the court hearing or through the court office.

Requirements for an application for clarification:

handwriting;
availability of details;
presence of a motivated request.

The application is drawn up in the name of the judicial authority that issued the act. The application must indicate the date the decision was made and the date the decision entered into legal force. The applicant puts his signature at the end of the text.

After considering the application, the court accepts and schedules a hearing. All participants in the proceedings may object to the provision of clarification. In other words, the adversarial nature of the process remains even if additional explanations are received from the court.

It is very important to draft the application correctly to obtain clarification. The document must be motivated. The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation indicates that the majority of applications do not contain significant arguments in favor of the need to provide explanations for the court decision. Quite often, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation itself refuses to provide an explanation with the wording “The Judicial Panel found no grounds for satisfying the application under Art. 202 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation.”

So fill out your application correctly and on time. If you are not sure that you will be able to get an explanation of the court decision alone, seek help from a professional lawyer.

Sources:

Art. 202. Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation. Explanation of the court decision

Court ruling during consideration of a civil case on the merits

The first most important determination is made by the court after filing a claim. The most expected option is to accept the claim for production. However, the court may also decide to return the statement of claim, leave it without progress, or refuse to accept the claim.

The court will also make a ruling when ordering an examination in civil cases, terminating proceedings in the case of violation of the rules of jurisdiction, etc. And if the size of the claim increases, the claim is clarified, etc. - Most likely no.

The parties involved in the case (plaintiff, defendant, third parties) can file a private complaint against most rulings made by the court. Such a possibility must either be directly provided for by the Civil Procedure Code. Liyuo further progress of the case becomes impossible. The text of the document must contain a link to the possibility of appeal. The period for filing a complaint is 15 days.

In particular, you can file a complaint against court rulings on the following issues:

acceptance, motion and return of the claim (Articles 134-136 of the Code of Civil Procedure);
legal expenses (on reducing the state duty, on the return of the state duty, on reimbursement of expenses for paying for the services of a representative, etc.);
restoration of the deadline for going to court (statute of limitations);
acceptance of material evidence in the case (Article 76 of the Code of Civil Procedure);
execution of a court decision (Article 213 of the Code of Civil Procedure), etc.

Regarding determinations that are not subject to appeal, the parties to the case and third parties can prepare their objections. They must be reflected in the minutes of the court hearing. Arguments about the illegality of the ruling or disagreement with it can be included in the text of the appeal.