ARCHIVE FOR 2017 RUSSIAN
mag->month > 0 ) { ?>
mag->getMonthString();?> mag->year;?>
mag->pdf_file): ?>
sess && $this->sess->isArticlePayed()):?>
Март 2017
CONTENT
FREE TRIBUNE
Elena Borisova Appeal on a Judgment Delivered through Simplified Procedure This article was inspired by two judgments of the 9th Appellate Arbitrazh Court in which the court
refused to consider appeals on judgments delivered through simplified procedure. The reason
for this decision was that the first instance court delivered only operative part of judgments. In
the simplified procedure, the court should write the reasons for a judgment only if a party to
proceedings requests it to do this. There was no such request in the cases discussed in the article.
As the Arbitrazh Procedure Court does not say that the first instance court could write reasons for a
judgment on its own motion, the Appellate Court decided that it should not consider the claim. The
article argues that more appropriate way to handle this issue is to initiate appellate proceedings,
consider the claim and dismiss it due to the absence of grounds for the judgment that could be
checked on appeal. Otherwise it could be said that the claimant’s right on the access to justice has
been restricted.
Keywords:
simplified procedure, operative part of judgment, appellate proceedings, dismissal of appellate claim
Buy a PDF
Artem Karapetov, Andrey Pavlov, Sergey Sarbash, Rashid Suleymanov Commentary to the Ruling of the Plenum of SC RF «On Certain Issues of Application of General Provisions of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on Obligations and Their Execution» No. 54, 22 November 2016 The article provides a detailed comment of the Ruling of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of Russia
«On Certain Issues of Application of General Provisions of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation
on Obligations and Their Execution» No. 54, 22 November 2016. The main focus is on the analysis of
new approaches of the Supreme Court to certain legal issues in the sphere of obligations. In particular,
clarification of the new rules of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on the performance of the
obligation by third parties should have high practical importance. This position of the Court in this regard
is reasonable. It is commented in detail in the article. The article also analyses number of important
issues related to the performance of obligations which, unfortunately, were not considered by the
authors of the Ruling. In particular, whether parties to a contract that is not related to business could be
given a right to rescind the contract unilaterally without good reason. Or whether it is possible to create
a conditional obligation which depends on the party who received payment (so called «flickering causa»
problem). Authors offer solution to these problems. However, it will take some time before the courts will
be able to resolve these problems without guidance of the Supreme Court.
Keywords:
obligation, fulfillment of obligation, Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation
