Article 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation. Jurisdiction of civil cases

Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation:

Article 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation. Jurisdiction of civil cases

1. Courts consider and resolve:

1) lawsuits involving citizens, organizations, state authorities, local governments for the protection of violated or contested rights, freedoms and legitimate interests, in disputes arising from civil, family, labor, housing, land, environmental and other legal relations;

2) cases on the requirements specified in Article 122 of this Code, resolved in the order of writ proceedings;

3) no longer in force on September 15, 2015. — Federal Law dated 03/08/2015 N 23-FZ;

4) cases of special proceedings specified in Article 262 of this Code;

5) cases on challenging decisions of arbitration courts and issuing writs of execution for the forced execution of decisions of arbitration courts;

6) cases on recognition and enforcement of decisions of foreign courts and foreign arbitration awards;

7) cases of assistance to arbitration courts in cases provided for by federal law.

cases on corporate disputes related to the creation of a legal entity, its management or participation in a legal entity that is a non-profit organization, with the exception of non-profit organizations, cases on corporate disputes of which are subject to the jurisdiction of arbitration courts by federal law.

2. Courts consider and resolve cases involving foreign citizens, stateless persons, foreign organizations, organizations with foreign investments, and international organizations.

3. Courts consider and resolve cases provided for in parts one and two of this article, with the exception of economic disputes and other cases referred to the competence of arbitration courts by federal constitutional law and federal law.

4. When filing an application with a court containing several interconnected claims, some of which are within the jurisdiction of a court of general jurisdiction, others - of an arbitration court, if separation of claims is impossible, the case is subject to consideration and resolution in a court of general jurisdiction.

If the division of claims is possible, the judge makes a ruling on the acceptance of claims within the jurisdiction of a court of general jurisdiction and on the return of the application regarding the claims within the jurisdiction of the arbitration court.

Return to the table of contents of the document: Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation

Comments on Article 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure, judicial practice of application

“Competence” and “jurisdiction” instead of “jurisdiction”

In procedural codes, as of October 1, 2019, the term “jurisdiction” has been replaced by the terms “competence” and “jurisdiction” (depending on the context). For more information about this, see the article “Competence and jurisdiction of cases under the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. Concepts. Changes since 2019."

In accordance with Part 3 of Article 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, courts consider and resolve cases provided for in parts one and two of this article, with the exception of economic disputes and other cases referred to the jurisdiction of arbitration courts by federal constitutional law and federal law...

Further (for more details), see paragraphs 3-6 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated January 20, 2003 N 2 “On some issues that arose in connection with the adoption and entry into force of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation”

If jurisdiction changes during the process

During the consideration of the case, a situation may arise when the jurisdiction of the case changes, for example, when the defendant changes his place of residence. But this does not mean that the case will automatically be transferred to another court.

The law establishes that if the court initially accepted the claim correctly, then despite the change in jurisdiction after the start of the hearing, the case cannot be transferred to another court.

There are only four exceptions when, after accepting a claim by one court, the case can still be transferred to another court (Article 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation) :

If both parties during the proceedings file a motion to send the case to the court at the location of the majority of the evidence .
If the claim was filed at the last known place of residence of the defendant or at the location of his property due to the fact that at the time of filing the claim it was impossible to establish his place of residence , and the defendant who appeared will file a petition to send the case to his residence.
If the claim was initially accepted by the court in violation of the rules of jurisdiction .
If, after the challenges of one or more judges, or for other reasons, replacing judges or considering a case in a given court becomes impossible. In this case, the case is transferred to a higher court based on jurisdiction (from 10/01/2019)

In practice, you may encounter a number of difficulties when determining the jurisdiction of a claim, including the unfounded return of a statement of claim . In this case, the court ruling must be appealed to a higher court.

Our lawyers will help at all stages of going to court , competently, in accordance with the requirements of procedural legislation, they will formulate the claim material and submit it to the necessary court, appeal the illegal return of the claim, and, if necessary, represent your interests in court.

Loan, guarantee

Claims simultaneously against the debtor - a legal entity and the guarantor - an individual are considered by courts of general jurisdiction

“Question 1. Which court - general jurisdiction or arbitration - should consider claims brought by the creditor simultaneously against the debtor - a legal entity (or individual entrepreneur) and the guarantor - an individual in the case where the guarantee agreement is concluded by an individual who is the only founder (participant) society, or another person controlling the activities of the company?

Answer: .. Based on the provisions of paragraph 1 of Art. 363 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, in case of non-fulfillment or improper fulfillment by the debtor of the obligation secured by the guarantee, the guarantor and the debtor are jointly and severally liable to the creditor, unless the law or agreement provides for subsidiary liability of the guarantor. Consequently, if a creditor’s demand for the fulfillment of a joint and several obligation is presented simultaneously to the debtor and the guarantor, this does not allow the court to make a decision on the separation of the stated claims based on the subject composition of the dispute and such a claim is subject to consideration within the framework of one case.

In accordance with Part 4 of Art. 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, when applying to court with an application containing several interrelated claims, some of which are within the jurisdiction of a court of general jurisdiction, others - of an arbitration court; if separation of claims is impossible, the case is subject to consideration and resolution in a court of general jurisdiction.

Thus, claims brought by the creditor simultaneously against the debtor - a legal entity (or individual entrepreneur) and the guarantor - an individual in the case where the guarantee agreement was concluded by an individual who is the sole founder (participant) of the company or other person controlling the activities of the company must be considered court of general jurisdiction. In accordance with Part 1 of Art. 150 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, proceedings on such claims in arbitration courts are terminated for the case as a whole” (the given answer to question No. 1 is contained in the “Review of the judicial practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 1 (2015)”, approved by the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on 03/04/2015)

Dispute between the company and one of its founders

A case regarding a dispute that has arisen between a lender (individual) and a borrower (business company) is considered by a court of general jurisdiction even in the case where the lender is one of the founders (participants) of this company.

The court came to the conclusion that such a dispute is not corporate, falling within the jurisdiction of the arbitration court, since it arose from loan agreements concluded between an individual and a business company, and is subject to consideration in a court of general jurisdiction even if the lender is one from the founders (participants) of this company (extract from the “Review of Judicial Practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 1 (2016)”; approved by the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on April 13, 2016).

Territorial jurisdiction

The law establishes the following rules of territorial jurisdiction:

General jurisdiction (Article 28 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation) - when the claim is filed in court at the place of residence of the defendant
Alternative jurisdiction (Article 29 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation) - when a claim can be filed in court both at the place of residence of the defendant and at the place of residence of the plaintiff
Exclusive jurisdiction (Article 30 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation) - when the law establishes the exact jurisdiction of the case. Remember that generic and exclusive jurisdiction are strictly defined by law and are not subject to change by agreement of the parties
Contractual jurisdiction (Article 32 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation) - when the parties, by agreement among themselves, can change the territorial jurisdiction of the dispute, that is, the contract specifies the specific court to which the dispute will be heard. However, the parties can only change the general and alternative jurisdiction
Jurisdiction for connection of cases (Article 31 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation) - establishes that a claim against several defendants can be filed at the place of residence of any of them, and a counterclaim is filed with the same judge who is considering the main claim

Knowing these rules, you will be able to correctly determine the court to file your claim. This is one of the most important points when going to court, since failure to comply with the rules of jurisdiction entails the return of the claim by the court . And this will significantly delay the process of restoring your violated rights, because the claim will have to be filed again in another court.

Additionally, filing a claim incorrectly may run the risk of missing the statute of limitations . For example, if a statement of claim is filed in the last days of the limitation period and the claim is reasonably returned by the court due to a violation of the rules of jurisdiction, and if by the time the claim is filed again in another court, the limitation period has expired, then it will be extremely difficult to restore it, and in the absence of other valid reasons, it is practically impossible. Of course, the statute of limitations can be applied by the court only at the request of the defendant.

Remember - the mere fact that you have already filed a claim within the limitation period, despite the fact that the claim was returned precisely in connection with a clear violation of the rules of jurisdiction, will not in the future be a basis for reinstating this period. Therefore, this issue must be approached responsibly.

If there are still difficulties in determining the jurisdiction of the case, or not everything is clear, contact us.

Legal assistance in procedural matters. Tel.+7 (812) 989-47-47 Telephone consultation

Environmental legal relations

Cases on disputes arising from environmental legal relations are considered by courts of general jurisdiction

To draw the attention of the courts to the fact that lawsuits involving citizens, organizations, state authorities and local governments for the protection of violated or contested rights, freedoms and legitimate interests in disputes arising from environmental legal relations are aimed at protecting the rights of citizens to a favorable environment , reliable information about its condition and compensation for damage caused to their health or property by an environmental violation, guaranteed by Article 42 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which determines the jurisdiction of these cases to courts of general jurisdiction (Article 126 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, paragraph 1 of part 1 of Article 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

Since the property relations of participants in civil (economic) turnover arising in the course of these persons carrying out entrepreneurial and other economic activities are not the subject of the stated claims in cases of this category, these cases are considered in courts of general jurisdiction, regardless of the subject composition of the persons involved in the case.

For more details, see paragraph 30 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated October 18, 2012 N 21 “On the application by courts of legislation on liability for violations in the field of environmental protection and natural resource management”

Claims for compensation for damage caused to the environment are considered by arbitration courts and courts of general jurisdiction, depending on the implementation of economic activities by entities. Legal positions of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation

If claims for compensation for damage caused to the environment by legal entities and individual entrepreneurs during their economic activities arise from the economic relations of these entities, then they are subject to consideration in the arbitration court.

In the Review of Judicial Practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 1 (2015), approved by the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on March 4, 2015 (issue No. 9), the legal position is formulated that procedural legislation delimits the subject competence of courts and arbitration courts according to the criteria of the subject the composition of the process and participation in entrepreneurial or other economic activities. If claims for compensation for damage caused to the environment by legal entities or individual entrepreneurs when carrying out types of economic activities, including those listed in paragraph 1 of Art. 34 of the Law on Environmental Protection, arise from the economic relations of these entities, these requirements, by virtue of the rules for the distribution of jurisdictional powers of courts established by procedural legislation, are subject to consideration in an arbitration court. If environmental damage is caused by the listed entities not in connection with their economic activities, then claims for compensation are subject to consideration in courts of general jurisdiction.

Thus, paragraph 30 of Resolution No. 21 should be interpreted in conjunction with the legal position set out in the Review of Judicial Practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated March 4, 2015 (paragraph 6 of the “Review of Judicial Practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 1 (2016)”; approved by the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on April 13, 2016)

Jurisdiction of the prosecutor's statements on the suspension of the activities of the enterprise, the demolition of their buildings for committing environmental offenses

“Question 1: Which courts - general jurisdiction or arbitration courts - have jurisdiction over prosecutorial applications filed in the interests of the state to suspend the activities of an enterprise, its structural unit, or to demolish any buildings belonging to legal entities or individual entrepreneurs for committing environmental offenses?

Answer. ... Since cases based on applications from prosecutors to suspend the activities of an enterprise, its structural unit, or to demolish buildings belonging to legal entities or individual entrepreneurs for committing environmental offenses that violate the rights of an indefinite number of citizens are not of an economic nature, these cases are within the jurisdiction of courts of general jurisdiction.” (extract from the “Review of Legislation and Judicial Practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation for the fourth quarter of 2006”, approved by the Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 03/07/2007 as amended on 07/04/2012)

Types of jurisdiction in the system of courts of general jurisdiction

Types of jurisdiction in the system of courts of general jurisdiction:

generic (subject);
territorial;
on connection of affairs.

Generic jurisdiction of civil cases

Patrimonial jurisdiction is the jurisdiction of civil cases at first instance by courts of a certain level of the judicial system.

Patrimonial jurisdiction is determined

the nature (kind) of the case,
subject of dispute
sometimes the subject composition of a material legal relationship (for example, when adopting children by foreigners).

All civil cases, in terms of their generic jurisdiction, are divided into four types:

jurisdictional magistrates,
jurisdictional to district courts,
jurisdictional to the supreme courts of the republic, regional, regional courts, city courts of the cities of Moscow and St. Petersburg, courts of the autonomous region, courts of autonomous districts,
jurisdictional to the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

According to generic jurisdiction, the competence of magistrates is delimited from district courts to consider cases in the first instance, district courts from the competence of courts of the constituent entities of the Federation, and the latter from the competence of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

At the same time, higher courts do not have the right to withdraw cases from lower courts for consideration, since, according to paragraph 1 of Art. 47 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, no one can be deprived of the right to have his case considered in the court and by the judge to whose jurisdiction it is assigned by law.

Territorial jurisdiction of civil cases

In addition to the type of case, another criterion for determining jurisdiction is the territory (administrative territory) in which a particular court operates. The attribute of the territory of operation of the court allows you to determine which of the similar courts (out of many district or courts of the constituent entities of the Federation) has jurisdiction over a given case.

This type of jurisdiction is called territorial (local) jurisdiction . The rules of territorial (local) jurisdiction allow the distribution of civil cases for consideration at first instance between similar courts.

The general rule of territorial jurisdiction (general territorial jurisdiction) is enshrined in Art. 28 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation. According to this rule, the claim is brought to the court at the place of residence of the defendant. A claim against an organization is brought at the location of the organization. The norm lays down the principle of interest, namely: a person interested in protecting his right brings a claim in the court in whose jurisdiction the defendant is located.

In the theory of civil procedural law, territorial jurisdiction is divided into subtypes:

general;
alternative (jurisdiction at the choice of the plaintiff) - the case is subject to jurisdiction not only of the court at the location of the defendant, but also of another court specified in the law;
exclusive - excludes the use of other types of territorial jurisdiction;
contractual - the parties, by agreement among themselves, can change the territorial jurisdiction for a given case.

The rule of general jurisdiction states: the claim is brought to the court at the place of residence of the defendant or at the location of the organization (Article 28 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation). In Art. 131 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation states that the plaintiff is obliged to indicate the defendant’s place of residence in the statement of claim. The court does not establish the place of residence, except in cases of searching for the defendant (Article 120 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

In Art. 29 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation establishes cases of determining alternative jurisdiction, i.e. place of consideration of the case at the choice of the plaintiff (choice by the party of the court either at the place of residence, location of the plaintiff, or the defendant).

Exclusive jurisdiction over certain categories of civil cases specified in the law (Article 30 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation) precisely predetermines the choice of court in the law. Filing claims in cases listed in the law in courts other than those indicated is excluded.

Contractual jurisdiction means that the parties, by agreement among themselves, can change the territorial jurisdiction for a given case. In accordance with the principle of discretion in civil proceedings, the parties have the right to determine for themselves the court that has jurisdiction over the case. However, they can change only two types of territorial jurisdiction: general (Article 28 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation) and alternative (Article 29 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation). Exclusive jurisdiction, like patrimonial jurisdiction, cannot be determined by agreement of the parties. These types of jurisdiction have regulations determined by law.

Business reputation

Jurisdiction of cases on protection of business reputation

The competence of arbitration courts includes the consideration of cases on the protection of business reputation in the field of entrepreneurial and other economic activities, regardless of the subject composition of the participants in disputed relations.

To resolve the issue of which court should consider the claim of an individual entrepreneur for the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation, it is necessary to establish in what capacity the applicant demands a refutation of defamatory information - as a business entity or as an individual. This approach is based on the provisions of paragraph 1 of part 1 and part 4 of article 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, paragraph 5 of part 1 of article 33 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and the explanations given in the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated February 24, 2005 No. 3 “On judicial practice in cases on the protection of the honor and dignity of citizens, as well as the business reputation of citizens and legal entities,” should also be taken into account when considering the claims of individual entrepreneurs, including claims for compensation for moral damage caused to their honor, dignity and business reputation. For more details, see paragraph 2 of the “Review of the practice of courts considering cases on disputes regarding the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation”, approved by the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on March 16, 2016.

OSAGO

When are disputes arising from an MTPL agreement considered by courts of general jurisdiction, and when are arbitration

Cases on disputes arising from the contract of compulsory civil liability insurance of vehicle owners (citizens, organizations, state authorities, local governments) and not related to their implementation of business and other economic activities are subject to consideration by courts of general jurisdiction (clause 1 of part 1 and part 3 of article 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

Cases on disputes arising from the contract of compulsory civil liability insurance of vehicle owners and related to the implementation of business and other economic activities by legal entities and individual entrepreneurs are subject to consideration by an arbitration court (Part 1 of Article 27, Article 28 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation).

For more details, see paragraphs. 3, 4 Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated January 29, 2015 N 2 “On the application by courts of legislation on compulsory insurance of civil liability of vehicle owners”

Jurisdiction of cases regarding the collection of insurance payments under compulsory motor liability insurance by a legal entity to which the citizen has assigned the rights of claim under the compulsory motor liability insurance agreement?

“Question 7. A court of general jurisdiction or an arbitration court should consider claims brought against an insurance company by a creditor - a legal entity (or individual entrepreneur) to whom the rights (claims) belonging to an individual were transferred (were transferred) under the contract of compulsory insurance of civil liability of vehicle owners funds?

Answer. ...One of the criteria for attributing a particular case to the competence of arbitration courts, along with the economic nature of the claim, is the subject composition of the parties to the dispute.

The conclusion of an agreement on the assignment of rights by a legal entity or an individual entrepreneur with the victim - an individual (or the transfer of rights under the agreement by way of subrogation) in this case is aimed at acquiring the rights of the victim under the obligation of the insurance organization to pay a certain amount of money and is associated with the implementation by such new creditors of a business or other economic activity.

Thus, the consideration of disputes on claims of legal entities (or individual entrepreneurs), to whom the rights (claims) under the contract of compulsory insurance of civil liability of vehicle owners were transferred (were transferred), to the insurance organization by virtue of Part 3 of Art. 22 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Part 2, Art. 27, art. 28 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation falls within the competence of arbitration courts” (“Review of the judicial practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 3 (2015)”, approved by the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on November 25, 2015).

How to determine the jurisdiction of a case?

When applying to a court of general jurisdiction, it is first necessary to determine the generic jurisdiction.

From the point of view of generic jurisdiction, cases within the jurisdiction of courts of general jurisdiction are divided into five types:

Cases under the jurisdiction of magistrates.

According to Art. 23 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the magistrate considers as a court of first instance:

cases of issuing a court order;
cases of divorce, if there is no dispute between the spouses about children;
cases of division of jointly acquired property between spouses with a claim price not exceeding fifty thousand rubles;
other cases arising from family law relations, with the exception of cases of challenging paternity (maternity), establishing paternity, deprivation of parental rights, limiting parental rights, adoption of a child, other cases of disputes about children and cases of recognition the marriage is invalid;
cases on property disputes, with the exception of cases on inheritance of property and cases arising from relations on the creation and use of results of intellectual activity, with the cost of the claim not exceeding fifty thousand rubles;
cases to determine the procedure for using property. Federal laws may include other cases under the jurisdiction of justices of the peace.

Cases within the jurisdiction of district/city courts.

The competence of this level of courts of general jurisdiction is determined on a residual basis. So, according to Art. 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the district court, as a court of first instance, considers cases, with the exception of cases within the jurisdiction of magistrates, military and specialized courts, the supreme court of the republic, the regional, regional court, the court of a federal city, the court of the autonomous region and the court of the autonomous district, the Supreme Court Russian Federation.

Cases within the jurisdiction of military and specialized courts.

According to Art. 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, in cases provided for by federal constitutional law, civil cases are considered by military and other specialized courts.

Cases within the jurisdiction of the supreme court of the republic, the regional court, the court of a federal city, the court of an autonomous region and the court of an autonomous district.

According to Art. 26 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation The Supreme Court of the Republic, the regional, regional court, the court of a federal city, the court of an autonomous region and the court of an autonomous district consider civil cases as a court of first instance:

related to state secrets;
on challenging regulatory legal acts of state authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation that affect the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of citizens and organizations;
on the suspension of activities or liquidation of a regional branch or other structural unit of a political party, interregional and regional public associations; on the liquidation of local religious organizations, centralized religious organizations consisting of local religious organizations located within one subject of the Russian Federation; on the prohibition of the activities of interregional and regional public associations and local religious organizations, centralized religious organizations consisting of local religious organizations located within one subject of the Russian Federation, which are not legal entities; on the suspension or termination of the activities of mass media distributed primarily in the territory of one constituent entity of the Russian Federation;
on challenging decisions (evading decision-making) of election commissions of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation (regardless of the level of elections, referendums), district election commissions for elections to legislative (representative) bodies of state power of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, with the exception of decisions upholding decisions of lower electoral commissions, referendum commissions;
on the disbandment of election commissions of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, district election commissions for elections to legislative (representative) bodies of state power of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation;
on the award of compensation for violation of the right to legal proceedings within a reasonable time or the right to execution of a judicial act within a reasonable time by grandfathers, jurisdictional judges of the peace, district courts.

Federal laws may include other cases under the jurisdiction of the supreme court of a republic, a regional court, a court of a federal city, a court of an autonomous region and a court of an autonomous district.

So, according to Part 2 of Art. 254 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, a refusal of permission to leave the Russian Federation due to the fact that the applicant is aware of information constituting a state secret is disputed in the relevant supreme court of the republic, regional, regional court, court of a federal city, court of an autonomous region, court of an autonomous district at the place where the decision was made to leave the request to leave without satisfaction.

Cases within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

According to Art. 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation considers civil cases as a court of first instance:

on challenging non-normative legal acts of the President of the Russian Federation, non-normative legal acts of the chambers of the Federal Assembly, non-normative legal acts of the Government of the Russian Federation;
on challenging regulatory legal acts of the President of the Russian Federation, regulatory legal acts of the Government of the Russian Federation and regulatory legal acts of other federal government bodies affecting the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of citizens and organizations;
on challenging decisions on the suspension or termination of the powers of judges or on the suspension or termination of their resignation (except for cases of termination of the powers of judges for committing disciplinary offenses);
on the suspension of activities or liquidation of political parties, all-Russian and international public associations, on the liquidation of centralized religious organizations that have local religious organizations in the territories of two or more constituent entities of the Russian Federation;
on challenging decisions (evading decision-making) of the Central Election Commission of the Russian Federation (regardless of the level of elections, referendum), with the exception of decisions that uphold decisions of lower election commissions, referendum commissions;
to resolve disputes between federal government bodies and government bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, between government bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, referred to the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation by the President of the Russian Federation in accordance with Art. 85 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation;
on the dissolution of the Central Election Commission of the Russian Federation;
on the award of compensation for violation of the right to trial within a reasonable time or the right to execution of a judicial act within a reasonable time in cases within the jurisdiction of federal courts, with the exception of district courts and garrison military courts.

How to determine the jurisdiction of a case?

Federal laws may include other cases under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

You should remember several rules of generic jurisdiction:

When combining several related claims, changing the subject of the claim or filing a counterclaim, if the new claims become subject to the jurisdiction of the district court, while others remain subject to the jurisdiction of the magistrate, all claims are subject to consideration in the district court.
In this case, if the jurisdiction of the case has changed during its consideration by the magistrate, the magistrate makes a ruling to transfer the case to the district court and transfers the case for consideration to the district court.
Disputes between the magistrate and the district court regarding jurisdiction are not allowed.

Having determined the generic jurisdiction of the dispute, it is necessary to determine the territorial jurisdiction. Territorial jurisdiction is divided into general, jurisdiction at the choice of the plaintiff (alternative), exclusive, by connection of cases, contractual.

General jurisdiction forms the rule according to which the claim is brought to the court at the place of residence of the defendant. A claim against an organization is brought to court at the location of the organization (Article 28 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

The plaintiff’s choice of territorial jurisdiction is allowed in the cases specified in Art. 29 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation:

a claim against a defendant whose place of residence is unknown or who does not have a place of residence in the Russian Federation may be brought to court at the location of his property or at his last known place of residence in the Russian Federation;
a claim against an organization arising from the activities of its branch or representative office may also be brought to the court at the location of its branch or representative office;
claims for the collection of alimony and for establishing paternity may also be brought by the plaintiff to the court at the place of his residence;
claims for divorce may also be brought to the court at the place of residence of the plaintiff in cases where there is a minor with him or, for health reasons, it is difficult for the plaintiff to travel to the defendant’s place of residence;
claims for compensation for damage caused by injury, other damage to health or as a result of the death of the breadwinner may also be brought by the plaintiff to the court at the place of his residence or the place where the damage was caused;
claims for restoration of labor, pension and housing rights, return of property or its value, related to compensation for losses caused to a citizen by illegal conviction, illegal criminal prosecution, illegal use of detention as a preventive measure, recognizance not to leave, or illegal imposition of administrative punishment in the form of an arrest, may also be presented to the court at the plaintiff’s place of residence;
claims for the protection of consumer rights can also be brought to the court at the place of residence or place of stay of the plaintiff or at the place of conclusion or place of execution of the contract;
claims for compensation for losses caused by collisions of ships, recovery of remuneration for providing assistance and rescue at sea may also be brought to the court at the location of the defendant’s ship or the ship’s home port;
claims arising from agreements that specify the place of their execution may also be brought to the court at the place of execution of such agreement;
according to Art. 254 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, an application to challenge a decision, action (inaction) of a government body, local government body, official, state or municipal employee can be filed by a citizen in the court at the place of his residence or at the location of the government body, local government body, official persons, state or municipal employees, whose decisions, actions (inactions) are being challenged.

Exclusive jurisdiction “excludes” the possibility of choosing jurisdiction other than that established by Art. 30 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, namely:

claims for rights to land plots, subsoil plots, buildings, including residential and non-residential premises, structures, structures, and other objects firmly connected to the land, as well as for the release of property from seizure, are brought to the court at the location of these objects or seized property ;
claims of the testator's creditors brought before the heirs accept the inheritance are subject to the jurisdiction of the court at the place where the inheritance was opened:
claims against carriers arising from transportation contracts are filed in court at the location of the carrier to whom the claim was filed in accordance with the established procedure

The jurisdiction of several related cases applies in the cases specified in Art. 31 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation:

a claim against several defendants residing or located in different places is brought to the court at the place of residence or location of one of the defendants at the choice of the plaintiff;
a counterclaim is brought to the court at the place where the original claim was considered.

A civil claim arising from a criminal case, if it was not brought or was not resolved during the criminal case, is brought for consideration in civil proceedings according to the rules of jurisdiction established by the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation.

Contractual jurisdiction allows, by agreement between the parties, to change the territorial jurisdiction for a given case before a court of general jurisdiction accepts it for its proceedings. The exclusive jurisdiction of the supreme court of the republic, the regional, regional court, the court of a federal city, the court of an autonomous region and the court of an autonomous district, and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation cannot be changed.

Friends, what do you think about how to determine the jurisdiction of a case ? Write a few words about this in the comments and share this information on social networks with your friends. And in order not to miss other important changes in new laws in the future, subscribe to receive news.

RAA Law

Free legal consultation by phone

Inheritance

Cases of inheritance legal relations fall under the jurisdiction of courts of general jurisdiction

Cases arising from inheritance legal relations are associated with the transfer of property rights and obligations in the order of universal succession from the testator to the heirs. These cases, regardless of the subject composition of their participants and the composition of the inherited property, are subject to the jurisdiction of courts of general jurisdiction (clause 1 of part 1 and part 3 of article 22, clause 5 of part 1 of article 23 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

...Cases on applications containing, along with claims arising from inheritance legal relations, claims within the jurisdiction of the arbitration court, the division of which is impossible, according to Part 4 of Article 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, are subject to consideration and resolution in a court of general jurisdiction.

For more details, see paragraph 1 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated May 29, 2012 N 9 “On judicial practice in inheritance cases”

Claims for payment to an heir of the value of a share in the company are considered by courts of general jurisdiction

“Question 7. Do the courts of general jurisdiction or arbitration courts have jurisdiction over claims for payment to the heir of the actual value of the testator’s share in the business company?

Answer. In accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 1176 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the inheritance of a participant in a limited liability company includes the share of this participant in the authorized capital of the corresponding company.

...In accordance with the provisions of clause 1, part 1 and part 3 of Art. 22, clause 5, part 1, art. 23 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, cases arising from inheritance legal relations, regardless of the subject composition of their participants and the composition of the inherited property, fall under the jurisdiction of courts of general jurisdiction.

In this regard, consideration of cases on claims for payment of the actual value of the testator’s share in the authorized (share) capital of a business partnership or company, or for the issuance of the corresponding part of the property in kind, for payment of the value of the share of a deceased member of a production cooperative, etc. subject to consideration in courts of general jurisdiction.

The stated conclusion corresponds to the legal position contained in paragraph 1 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated May 29, 2012 No. 9 “On judicial practice in inheritance cases” (the answer to question No. 7 is contained in the “Review of the judicial practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation N 1 (2015)” (approved by the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on 03/04/2015).

The concept of jurisdiction in the system of courts of general jurisdiction

Jurisdiction and jurisdiction
The concept of jurisdiction must be distinguished from jurisdiction.

The rules on jurisdiction determine the competence of specific courts within the judicial system (within a specific branch) to consider and resolve civil cases.

The rules on jurisdiction differentiate the competence of courts of general jurisdiction from other courts (arbitration, arbitration), as well as other government bodies and organizations that have the right to consider and resolve certain issues of law.

The condition for the emergence of a civil process in a specific dispute is the decision by the judge of a two-sided problem:

whether the resolution of a particular dispute falls within the jurisdiction of the court (jurisdiction);
which specific court is required to consider this case (jurisdiction).

Jurisdiction is an institution (a set of legal norms) that regulates the relevance of cases within the jurisdiction of the courts to the jurisdiction of a specific court of the judicial system for their consideration at first instance.

The jurisdiction of civil cases is regulated by Ch. 3 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation.

Labor disputes

Jurisdiction of cases regarding the collection of wages in the event of bankruptcy of the employer

“Question 2. Do courts of general jurisdiction have jurisdiction over cases of workers’ claims for the collection of wages if the arbitration court in a bankruptcy case has imposed supervision on the employer (debtor organization) or made a decision on bankruptcy and the opening of bankruptcy proceedings?

Answer. ... The nature of the legal relations from which individual labor disputes arise, including disputes over the collection of wages, excludes the possibility of referring such disputes to the jurisdiction of arbitration courts, including when considering bankruptcy cases.

This conclusion is confirmed by the provision of the second paragraph of clause 11 of Art. 16 of the Federal Law “On Insolvency (Bankruptcy)”, which contains the rule that labor disputes between the debtor and the debtor’s employee are considered in the manner prescribed by labor legislation and civil procedural legislation.

Thus, in the event that an arbitration court in a bankruptcy case introduces supervision or makes a decision on bankruptcy and the opening of bankruptcy proceedings against an employer (debtor organization), cases regarding claims of employees to collect wages from such an employer fall under the jurisdiction of courts of general jurisdiction" (extract from the “Review of legislation and judicial practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation for the third quarter of 2010”, approved by the Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated December 8, 2010)

Cases regarding compensation for damage caused in connection with an industrial accident are heard by district courts

Cases regarding disputes regarding compensation for harm caused to the life or health of the insured in connection with an industrial accident and occupational disease, in accordance with paragraph 1 of part 1 of Article 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, are subject to the jurisdiction of courts of general jurisdiction. These cases, including compensation for moral damage, in accordance with Articles 23 and 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation are subject to the jurisdiction of district courts.

See paragraph 1 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated March 10, 2011 No. 2 “On the application by courts of legislation on compulsory social insurance against industrial accidents and occupational diseases”

Procedure for an employee to take before going to court

Before going to court, an employee must comply with the rules of the claim procedure for pre-trial resolution of labor disputes. Conflict resolution before trial includes a number of activities:

Negotiation. At the declarative stage, the employee can try to negotiate with his immediate supervisor and try to find a compromise. This tactic only works if there are minor disagreements with the employer, otherwise it can lead to an escalation of the conflict. The Labor Code of the Russian Federation does not directly indicate that an employee is required to conduct preliminary negotiations before applying to the Labor Dispute Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Labor Dispute Commission) (see Article 387 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).
Contacting the CTS (if negotiations with the employer did not produce a positive result). An employee has the right to appeal to this authority within 3 months from the moment of discovery of a violation of his legal rights under the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. Such a date may be the day of non-payment of due wages, the date of an unlawful disciplinary sanction, etc.

If at the time of the violation the employee was on vacation, a business trip or on sick leave, then the deadline for filing the application must be restored. The commission considers applications within 10 days on the merits of the dispute. If an employee or legal representative is absent from the CCC meeting, it will be postponed to another date. If you fail to appear again without a valid reason, the matter will be removed from consideration. In this case, the employee has the right to re-apply to the CTS before the expiration of the already valid 3-month period. Upon inspection, the commission makes a decision, which must be executed within three days from the date of its adoption. In case of an unsatisfactory result, the employer or employee has the right to file a claim in court within 10 days from the date all parties to the conflict receive a copy of the CCC decision.

Consumer rights

Disputes regarding consumer rights are heard by courts of general jurisdiction

Cases on claims related to violation of consumer rights, by virtue of paragraph 1 of Article 11 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, Article 17 of the Law on the Protection of Consumer Rights, Article 5 and paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Article 22 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation) are subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of general jurisdiction.

In accordance with Articles 45 and 46 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Articles 44, 45 and 46 of the Law on the Protection of Consumer Rights, a court of general jurisdiction has jurisdiction over cases on claims of prosecutors, authorized bodies, local government bodies, public associations of consumers (their associations, unions) having legal status persons, to the manufacturer (seller, performer, authorized organization or authorized individual entrepreneur, importer), filed in defense of the rights and legitimate interests of an indefinite number of consumers.

See paragraphs 15, 20 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated June 28, 2012 N 17 “On the consideration by courts of civil cases in disputes regarding the protection of consumer rights”

Why determine jurisdiction in civil cases?

Most often, people are forced to go to court to resolve a dispute. Moreover, when all possibilities for pre-trial settlement of the dispute have been exhausted. There are many different law firms on the service market - you can turn to professional lawyers who will do all the work for a person or organization. But if you decide to file a claim on your own, this article will help you figure out how to correctly determine the jurisdiction of civil cases and where to file a claim.

The jurisdiction of civil cases is divided into generic and territorial. The delimitation of cases between courts of general jurisdiction is revealed in detail by Chapter 3 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation), Chapter 4 of the Arbitration Procedure Code (economic dispute), Chapter 2 of the Code of Administrative Proceedings (in cases of administrative proceedings).

This publication will focus on civil cases. Jurisdiction is discussed in detail in special articles devoted to going to court on certain issues. On the website we have posted examples of claims for consumer protection, recognition of ownership of unauthorized construction, etc. Questions about determining jurisdiction, resolving a dispute, presenting evidence in a civil case, and other questions can be asked to the site’s duty lawyer.

So, the statement of claim must be filed in the court that is authorized to hear the case. If the rules of jurisdiction are not followed, the statement of claim is returned. And the plaintiff (applicant in cases of special proceedings, claimant in cases of issuing a court order) is forced to spend additional time and effort to correct the situation.

Harm to health

Cases regarding disputes regarding compensation for harm to life and health are heard by district courts

By virtue of paragraph 1 of part 1 of Article 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, cases regarding disputes regarding compensation for harm caused to the life or health of a citizen are subject to the jurisdiction of courts of general jurisdiction.

These cases, including compensation for moral damage when harm is caused to the life or health of a citizen, in accordance with Articles 23 and 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation are subject to the jurisdiction of district courts.

See paragraph 1 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated January 26, 2010 No. 1 “On the application by courts of civil legislation regulating relations regarding obligations resulting from harm to the life or health of a citizen”

Changes in the competence of magistrates and district courts from 10/01/2019

The competence of justices of the peace has been clarified . In particular, it is stipulated that the magistrate considers in the first instance cases on property disputes arising in the field of consumer rights protection when the cost of the claim does not exceed 100 thousand rubles. (Article 23 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation). Other property disputes, the cost of a claim for which does not exceed 50 thousand rubles, are, as before, considered by magistrates.

From October 1, 2019, the jurisdiction of magistrates and district courts changes.

The following cases have been removed from the jurisdiction of magistrates:

on disputes regarding the determination of the procedure for using property;
family disputes, except for disputes about divorce (if there is no dispute about children), as well as disputes about the division of jointly acquired property (if the value of the claim does not exceed 50 thousand rubles).

These categories of cases are considered by the district court.

The jurisdiction of district courts now also includes corporate disputes regarding non-profit organizations, except for those uniting commercial organizations and individual entrepreneurs. Article 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation states that “cases on corporate disputes related to the creation of a legal entity, its management or participation in a legal entity that is a non-profit organization, with the exception of non-profit organizations, cases on corporate disputes of which are subject to the jurisdiction of arbitration courts by federal law” .

Earlier, in paragraph 30 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated June 23, 2015 N 25, it was also explained that “other corporate disputes related to the creation, management or participation in other corporations that are non-profit organizations are considered by courts of general jurisdiction (paragraph 3 of Article 50 , paragraph 1 of Article 65.1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, Article 22 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation).”

Intellectual property

Jurisdiction of disputes about who is the author of the result of intellectual activity

When determining the jurisdiction of cases related to the application of the provisions of part four of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, courts should proceed from the following.

Disputes about who is the author of the result of intellectual activity are within the jurisdiction of courts of general jurisdiction as not related to the implementation of entrepreneurial and other economic activities.

Jurisdiction of disputes regarding violations of intellectual rights to the results of intellectual activity and equivalent means of individualization of legal entities, goods, works, services and enterprises, on the identification of the patent holder, on the right of prior use and subsequent use, as well as disputes arising from agreements on the alienation of exclusive rights and licensing contracts is determined based on the subject composition of the parties to the dispute, if such a dispute is related to the implementation of entrepreneurial and other economic activities.

See paragraph 1 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 5, the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation No. 29 of March 26, 2009 “On some issues that arose in connection with the entry into force of part four of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation”

Jurisdiction of disputes regarding the protection of copyright and related rights in claims of RAO

An organization that carries out collective management of copyright and related rights has the right, on the basis of paragraph 5 of Article 1242 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, to make demands in court on behalf of copyright holders or on its own behalf to protect the rights that it manages.

If the specified organization appeals to protect the rights of individuals or both individuals and legal entities, or an indefinite number of persons, such disputes are subject to the jurisdiction of courts of general jurisdiction. If it seeks to protect the rights of legal entities only in connection with their business and other economic activities, the disputes fall under the jurisdiction of arbitration courts.

See paragraph 21 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 5, Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation No. 29 of March 26, 2009 “On some issues that arose in connection with the entry into force of part four of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation”

How territorial jurisdiction was manipulated using a surety agreement

At one time, in order to get a statement of claim into the “right” court, the scheme associated with a surety agreement was very popular. This, as you know, is one of the ways to ensure the fulfillment of an obligation.

The loophole was as follows. The consent of the debtor is not required to conclude a surety agreement between the creditor and the guarantor. It can be concluded even against the wishes of the debtor. Or even without his knowledge.

The guarantor and the debtor are jointly and severally liable to the creditor. That is, if the debtor fails to fulfill his obligation, the creditor has the right to make a claim against both the debtor himself and the guarantor.

In court proceedings they act as co-defendants. If they live in different places, then the right to choose a court belongs to the creditor by virtue of Art. 31 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation and Part 2 of Art. 36 APK. The creditor chooses whether to file a claim in court at the place of residence (location) of the debtor or at the place of residence (location) of the guarantor.

As you understand, the claim was brought at the place of residence of the guarantor, since there was an agreement between the creditor and the guarantor. The debtor sometimes had no idea that someone was vouching for him.

It could turn out that the guarantor was located in Moscow, and the debtor was located somewhere in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky. The creditor, in order to make it difficult or impossible for the debtor to participate in the process, filed a claim at the place of residence of the guarantor. For example, to the Moscow Arbitration Court (if the case is within the jurisdiction of the arbitration court).

But then the shop was closed.

On July 12, 2012, Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation No. 42 “On some issues of resolving disputes related to guarantees” was adopted. Paragraph 5 states that when establishing the coordination of actions of the creditor and the guarantor, which could cause, among other things, such an unfavorable consequence as a change in the jurisdiction of the dispute, the court can determine the proper jurisdiction of the dispute between the creditor and the debtor.

Further, in paragraph 6 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation No. 42, it is explained that the court separates the claim against the debtor into separate proceedings and transfers it to the court at the location of the debtor or determined by agreement between the debtor and the creditor when establishing the fact of concluding a surety agreement without the knowledge and consent of the debtor for unfair change of jurisdiction.

Here is a list of circumstances that may indicate that the conclusion of a surety agreement was the sole purpose of changing the jurisdiction of the dispute:

the guarantor and the debtor are not connected by any relationships that could justify the economic purpose of issuing a guarantee for the debtor (corporate, obligatory, related, etc.);
the claim for an obligation secured by a guarantee is brought to the court at the location of the plaintiff, or differs from the court specified in the agreement between the creditor and the debtor, or is located in such a way that the personal presence and participation of the debtor in the consideration of the case can be very difficult.

Others

Jurisdiction of the case on the issuance of a writ of execution for the execution of an arbitration court decision

“Question 5: Which court has jurisdiction over cases of issuing writs of execution for the forced execution of arbitration court decisions in disputes between citizens and commercial organizations?

Answer: ...the specified dispute is within the jurisdiction of the arbitration court if it arose during the implementation of entrepreneurial activities by an entrepreneur or commercial organization.

If the dispute is of a different nature and has a different subject composition, such a dispute, based on the provisions of Art. 22 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation and Art. 27 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, is under the jurisdiction of a court of general jurisdiction.

On this basis, we can conclude that a dispute between a citizen and a commercial organization is within the jurisdiction of a court of general jurisdiction" (extract from the "Review of Legislation and Judicial Practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation for the third quarter of 2006", approved by the Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated November 29, 2006 of the year).

Cases fall under the jurisdiction of courts of general jurisdiction.

Courts of general jurisdiction consider and resolve:

1. Claims involving citizens, organizations, state authorities, local governments for the protection of violated or contested rights, freedoms and legitimate interests in disputes arising from civil, family, labor, housing, land, environmental and other legal relations,

All claims and non-claims cases are considered by courts of general jurisdiction, provided that they do not fall into the category of economic disputes and other cases assigned by law to the jurisdiction of arbitration courts.

2. The courts have jurisdiction over cases of writ proceedings on claims, for example, based on a notarized transaction, on a transaction made in simple written form, on a protest against bills of exchange for non-payment, non-acceptance and undated acceptance made by a notary, etc. (Article 122 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

3. Courts consider and resolve cases arising from public legal relations, for example, on applications for the protection of electoral rights or the right to participate in a referendum of citizens of the Russian Federation, and other cases (Article 245 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

4. Courts have jurisdiction over special proceedings. All categories of these cases are listed in Art. 262 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, there are a total of 11 types of cases, for example cases about establishing facts of legal significance, about the adoption of a child, etc. The law contains a norm (Part 2 of Article 262), which states that cases Other cases may also be classified as special proceedings by federal law.

5. Cases on challenging decisions of arbitration courts and issuing writs of execution for forced execution of decisions of arbitration courts (Chapter 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation),

6. Cases on recognition and enforcement of decisions of foreign courts and foreign arbitration awards (Chapter 46 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation),

7. Cases arising in connection with the execution of acts of courts of general jurisdiction and acts of other bodies (Section VII of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

Jurisdiction.

The concept of jurisdiction and its types.

Constitution of the Russian Federation in Art. 47 determines that no one can be deprived of the right to have a case considered in the court and by the judge to whose jurisdiction it is assigned by law.

To determine the jurisdiction of a particular civil case means to establish a competent, proper court in this case. Determining the appropriate court that has jurisdiction over a specific civil case is necessary both for the person applying to the court and for the judge when accepting the application .

When deciding whether to initiate proceedings against a citizen, a judge must check whether the interested person applying to the court observes the rules of jurisdiction, violation of which entails the filing of a statement of claim (Clause 2, Part 1, Article 135 of the Code of Civil Procedure).

A case accepted by the court for proceedings in violation of the rules of jurisdiction identified during the consideration process is subject to transfer to the court that has jurisdiction over it (clause 3, part 2, article 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure).

Jurisdiction is an institution (a set of legal norms) that regulates the relevance of cases within the jurisdiction of the courts to the jurisdiction of a specific judicial system for consideration at first instance

.In accordance with the Federal Law “On the Judicial System of the Russian Federation”, the system of courts of general jurisdiction is formed by federal courts, magistrates, and courts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation (Article 4).

The division of competence between courts to consider and resolve civil cases at first instance is carried out, on the one hand, by the type (nature) of cases to be resolved by courts of different levels, on the other, in accordance with the territorial jurisdiction of homogeneous courts (of the same level).

Based on this distinction, procedural science distinguishes between two types of jurisdiction - generic and territorial.

Territorial jurisdiction, in turn, is divided into: 1 general jurisdiction, 2 jurisdiction at the choice of the plaintiff, 3 exclusive jurisdiction, 4 contractual jurisdiction, 5 jurisdiction in connection with cases.

Rules on jurisdiction that territorially delimit the jurisdiction of the same level of courts of the judicial system constitute territorial jurisdiction.

The rules on jurisdiction, which serve to differentiate the powers of the court at various levels to consider civil cases within the system of courts of general jurisdiction (arbitration courts), constitute generic jurisdiction.