对按简易程序顺序作出的决定的上诉期限的计算问题

IF 0.2 Q4 LAW
N. G. Galkovskaya
{"title":"对按简易程序顺序作出的决定的上诉期限的计算问题","authors":"N. G. Galkovskaya","doi":"10.52468/2542-1514.2023.7(1).124-133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The subject of the research is the features of the appeal of court decisions in cases considered in summary proceedings.The methodology. Analysis and synthesis, dialectical method as well as formal legal interpretation of Russian legislative acts.The main results. The author critically assesses the provisions of the procedural legislation, focuses on the problems that exist in practice. (1) There is a different procedure for notifying a decision adopted as a result of summary proceedings, according to the norms of the Civil Procedure Code and of the Arbitration Procedure Code. (2) It is concluded that the dependence of the beginning of the period for filing an application for drawing up a reasoned decision on the day of placement of the operative part of the decision or on the day of its adoption significantly complicates the timely implementation of such a right. A different construction will be justified and practically convenient: fixing in the law a single moment of the beginning of the period for an appeal against a decision - from the moment a copy of the operative part is delivered (irrespective of the application for drawing up a reasoned decision). (3) If the deadline for filing an application for the preparation of a reasoned decision is missed, the issue of its restoration should be resolved only if the deadline for filing an appeal has not been missed. If the deadline for filing an appeal is missed, then a reasoned decision on the case should be made only if the specified dead-line is restored.Recommendations are offered on the possible improvement of procedural rules on summary proceedings. In particular, the issue of increasing the period for applying for a reasoned decision was raised. It is proposed that the start time for filing an application for the preparation of a reasoned decision be determined from the day a copy of the decision is handed over to the persons participating in the case, or the decision is posted on the court's website.Conclusions. The identified problems call into question the merits of the summary procedure, show in practice its difficult and complicated order. The existing model of summary proceedings needs to be significantly detailed in order to increase the guarantees of judicial protection.","PeriodicalId":40342,"journal":{"name":"Pravoprimenenie-Law Enforcement Review","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Problems of calculation of the terms of appeals of decisions made in the order of summary proceedings\",\"authors\":\"N. G. Galkovskaya\",\"doi\":\"10.52468/2542-1514.2023.7(1).124-133\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The subject of the research is the features of the appeal of court decisions in cases considered in summary proceedings.The methodology. Analysis and synthesis, dialectical method as well as formal legal interpretation of Russian legislative acts.The main results. The author critically assesses the provisions of the procedural legislation, focuses on the problems that exist in practice. (1) There is a different procedure for notifying a decision adopted as a result of summary proceedings, according to the norms of the Civil Procedure Code and of the Arbitration Procedure Code. (2) It is concluded that the dependence of the beginning of the period for filing an application for drawing up a reasoned decision on the day of placement of the operative part of the decision or on the day of its adoption significantly complicates the timely implementation of such a right. A different construction will be justified and practically convenient: fixing in the law a single moment of the beginning of the period for an appeal against a decision - from the moment a copy of the operative part is delivered (irrespective of the application for drawing up a reasoned decision). (3) If the deadline for filing an application for the preparation of a reasoned decision is missed, the issue of its restoration should be resolved only if the deadline for filing an appeal has not been missed. If the deadline for filing an appeal is missed, then a reasoned decision on the case should be made only if the specified dead-line is restored.Recommendations are offered on the possible improvement of procedural rules on summary proceedings. In particular, the issue of increasing the period for applying for a reasoned decision was raised. It is proposed that the start time for filing an application for the preparation of a reasoned decision be determined from the day a copy of the decision is handed over to the persons participating in the case, or the decision is posted on the court's website.Conclusions. The identified problems call into question the merits of the summary procedure, show in practice its difficult and complicated order. The existing model of summary proceedings needs to be significantly detailed in order to increase the guarantees of judicial protection.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40342,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pravoprimenenie-Law Enforcement Review\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pravoprimenenie-Law Enforcement Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52468/2542-1514.2023.7(1).124-133\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pravoprimenenie-Law Enforcement Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52468/2542-1514.2023.7(1).124-133","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的主题是在简易程序中审议的案件中对法院判决提出上诉的特点。的方法。对俄罗斯立法行为的分析与综合、辩证方法以及形式法律解释。主要结果。笔者对程序性立法的规定进行了批判性的评析,重点分析了程序性立法在实践中存在的问题。(1)根据《民事诉讼法》和《仲裁诉讼法》的规范,通知简易程序所作出的决定有不同的程序。(2)得出的结论是,提出提出合理决定的申请的期限的开始日期依赖于决定的执行部分放置之日或决定通过之日,这大大复杂化了这种权利的及时实施。一种不同的解释将是合理的,而且实际上是方便的:在法律中规定对一项决定提出上诉的时期开始的一个时刻- -从提交执行部分副本的那一刻起(无论提出合理决定的申请如何)。(三)过了准备理由决定的申请期限的,在未过上诉期限的情况下,才应当解决恢复理由决定的问题。超过申诉期限的,只有恢复到规定的期限,才能作出合理的判决。就可能改进简易程序的程序规则提出了建议。特别提出了延长申请合理决定的期限的问题。建议从裁决书副本交予当事人之日或者裁决书在法院网站上公布之日起,确定申请编制理由裁决书的开始时间。所发现的问题对简易程序的优点提出了质疑,在实践中显示了其困难和复杂的顺序。现有的简易程序模式需要大大细化,以增加司法保护的保障。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Problems of calculation of the terms of appeals of decisions made in the order of summary proceedings
The subject of the research is the features of the appeal of court decisions in cases considered in summary proceedings.The methodology. Analysis and synthesis, dialectical method as well as formal legal interpretation of Russian legislative acts.The main results. The author critically assesses the provisions of the procedural legislation, focuses on the problems that exist in practice. (1) There is a different procedure for notifying a decision adopted as a result of summary proceedings, according to the norms of the Civil Procedure Code and of the Arbitration Procedure Code. (2) It is concluded that the dependence of the beginning of the period for filing an application for drawing up a reasoned decision on the day of placement of the operative part of the decision or on the day of its adoption significantly complicates the timely implementation of such a right. A different construction will be justified and practically convenient: fixing in the law a single moment of the beginning of the period for an appeal against a decision - from the moment a copy of the operative part is delivered (irrespective of the application for drawing up a reasoned decision). (3) If the deadline for filing an application for the preparation of a reasoned decision is missed, the issue of its restoration should be resolved only if the deadline for filing an appeal has not been missed. If the deadline for filing an appeal is missed, then a reasoned decision on the case should be made only if the specified dead-line is restored.Recommendations are offered on the possible improvement of procedural rules on summary proceedings. In particular, the issue of increasing the period for applying for a reasoned decision was raised. It is proposed that the start time for filing an application for the preparation of a reasoned decision be determined from the day a copy of the decision is handed over to the persons participating in the case, or the decision is posted on the court's website.Conclusions. The identified problems call into question the merits of the summary procedure, show in practice its difficult and complicated order. The existing model of summary proceedings needs to be significantly detailed in order to increase the guarantees of judicial protection.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
66.70%
发文量
79
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信