At present when the civil society in Russia is at the stage of formation we cannot speak about adulthood thereof. Participation of citizens in delivering justice is not only obligatory feature of civil society, but also one of the fundamental constitutional principles of justice.
The article makes a critical analysis of the legal positions and final conclusions of the ECHR decision from 12.05.2015 "R.M. Abrahamian vs. the Russian Federation" No. 38951/13; as a consequence, the last one is in contradiction with the nature, the purpose and the procedure of cassation appeal of final acts as an exceptional (extraordinary) form
The author substantiates the thesis that an arbitration court can reclaim from a party to the dispute evidence, that is necessary for the other party to ground its arguments and objections. If the court has reclaimed an evidence, and the party fails to submit it, such party is considered to have conceded facts, claimed by the other party.
The author grounds his position that if a person affiliated to the debtor files a claim that emerged due to granting of a loan or other financing on non-market conditions such claim shall be found just but satisfied after the claims of independent creditors.
This article is devoted to analysis the problem of the efficiency of lеgal norms contained in KAS RF. In particular the author evaluates the norms about judicial discretion, the adversarial principle with an active role of the court, access to justice and enforceability of court decisions. The author analyzes the number of reversed decisions in 2016 as well. In conclusion the author considers that some norms of KAS are ambiguous and such ambiguity influences to the efficiency of justice in administrative cases.
The numerous verdicts on the cases with pre-judicial agreements on cooperation have entered into force. The analysis of these documents allows: firstly to reveal problems inherent for the new type of judicial proceeding, secondly, evaluate the consequences of application of chapter 40-1 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the RF for participants of the procedure. The reader is presented with four articles which analyze judicial practice.
The author of the article on the basis of analysis of examples from judicial practice tries to draw the readers’ attention to the problems related to a new type of judicial proceeding — «On Special Procedure of Taking Judicial Decision in Conclusion of Prejudicial Agreement of Cooperation» (Chapter 40(1 of the Criminal Procedure Code) and proposes to evaluate the consequences of decision taken by the judge in the part of punishment for participants of procedure.
The author of the article presents his own view on solution of problems related to securing of rights of suffered person in criminal procedure and in this connection comments on various provisions of Decrees of Plenum of the Supreme Court of the RF of June 29, 2010 № 17 «On Practice of Application by Courts of the Norms Regulating Participation of the Suffered Person in Criminal Judicial Procedure».
The author grounds the thesis that satisfaction of several claims aimed at protection of a single subjective right doesn't contradict to the current legislation. If one of such judgements is fulfilled, the respondents on the other judgements can file anti-enforcement claims, which in the present situations can be realized by application of article 327 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.