Везде
On the Prospects of Judicial Competence Redistribution in Writ Proceedings
Table of contents
Annotation Estimate Publication content
References Comments
Share
QR
Metrics
On the Prospects of Judicial Competence Redistribution in Writ Proceedings
Annotation
PII
S1605-65900000622-5-1
DOI
10.12737/jrp.2023.078
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
Evgeniy Fokin 
ORCID: 0000-0002-1121-6830
Occupation: Senior Researcher, Center of International Law and Comparative Legal Studies
Affiliation: Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation
Address: Moscow, Russia
Edition
Volume 27 No. 7
Pages
47-60
Abstract

The question of whether writ proceedings should remain within the judicial competence is being investigated in present article. This procedure is designed to consider indisputable claims that do not require the examination of evidence and the implementation of a full judicial procedure. The absence of a significant legal conflict in the writ proceedings gives scientists grounds to assert that the function of issuing a court order should be transferred from the judge to other law enforcement entities.

The proposals expressed in science on the transfer of writ proceedings to the jurisdiction of artificial intelligence, assistant judges, notaries are considered in detail. It is proved that artificial intelligence cannot replace the court in the implementation of the writ procedure due to the lack of sufficient opportunities to distinguish indisputable claims from claims implying a dispute about the law. Assistant judges remain auxiliary personnel: due to the qualification requirements imposed on them, they are not ready to assume new powers. The transfer of writ proceedings to notaries will lead to a radical overload of the Russian notary. The implementation of each of these three proposals will require substantial reform of procedural legislation (and, in relation to notaries, legislation on notaries), for which the Russian legal system is not ready. In addition, the removal of writ proceedings from the judicial competence will not contribute to improving the protection of claimants and debtors, but on the contrary, will create additional risks.

Conclusion: writ proceedings should remain a judicial procedure implemented by a court (judge) in a shortened procedural form.

Keywords
writ proceedings, artificial intelligence, notaries, assistant judges
Date of publication
21.07.2023
Number of purchasers
12
Views
159
Readers community rating
0.0 (0 votes)
Cite Download pdf
1

References



Additional sources and materials

1. Zuckerman A. Reform of Civil Procedure: Rationing Procedure Rather Than Access to Justice. Journal of Law and Society, 1995, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 157—159. 
2. Branovitskiy K. L., Neznamov Al. V., Neznamov An. V., Rents I. G., Yarkov V. V. Opyt vnedreniya tsifrovykh tekhnologiy v rossiyskiy tsivilisticheskiy protsess. In: Branovitskiy K. L., Yarkov V. V. (eds). Tsifrovye tekhnologii i yurisdiktsionnaya deyatel’nost’: obraz budushchego pravosudiya po grazhdanskim delam. Moscow, 2022. 334 p. 
3. Glazkova M. E. Razvitie zakonodatel’stva o grazhdanskom sudoproizvodstve. In: Khabrieva T. Y., Tikhomirov Yu. A. (eds). Scientific Concept of Development of the Russian Legislation. 7th ed. Moscow, 2015. 544 p. (In Russ.) 
4. Diakonova M. O. Transformation of judicial protection of civil rights in the conditions of digitalization. In: Kucherov I. I., Sinitsyn S. A. (eds). Digital Economy: Current Directions of Legal Regulation: scientific and practical guide. Moscow, 2022. 376 p. (In Russ.) 
5. Zhuykov V. M. Obshchaya kontseptsiya razvitiya protsessual’nogo zakonodatel’stva. In: Khabrieva T. Y., Tikhomirov Yu. A. (eds). Concepts of the development of Russian legislation. Moscow, 2010. 731 p. (In Russ.) 
6. Kazikhanova S. S. Otnosheniya, reguliruemye normami, soderzhashchimisya v tsivilisticheskikh protsessual’nykh kodeksakh, i predmet grazhdanskogo protsessual’nogo prava. Aktual’nye problemy rossiyskogo prava, 2022, no. 2, pp. 118—127. 
7. Krymskiy D. I. Uproshchennye proizvodstva v grazhdanskom protsesse zarubezhnykh stran. Cand. diss. thesis. Moscow, 2011. 26 p. 
8. Krymskiy D. I. Uproshchennye proizvodstva po grazhdanskim delam v zarubezhnom zakonodatel’stve i sudebnoy praktike. Rossiyskiy sud’ya, 2020, no. 12, pp. 51—55. 
9. Kurova N. N., Stroganova N. K. Edinaya informatsionnaya sistema notariata: novye realii, problemy i perspektivy. Notarius, 2021, no. 5, pp. 44—48. 
10. Nenashev M. M. Legal precondition of the dispute on right. Journal of Russian Law, 2007, no. 8. pp. 28—37. (In Russ.) 
11. Prokudina L. A. Institut pomoshchnika sud’i (sovremennyy status). Yuridicheskiy mir, 2009, no. 10, pp. 43—47. 
12. Prokudina L. A. Uchastie apparata suda v osushchestvlenii sudebnoy deyatel’nosti. Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki, 2009, no. 3, pp. 50—56. 
13. Rozhkova M. A. Concept of civil right dispute. Journal of Russian Law, 2005, no. 4. pp. 98— 102. (In Russ.) 
14. Sorokopud A. V. O pravovoy prirode prikaznogo i uproshchennogo proizvodstva v tsivilisticheskom protsesse v svete poiska sposobov optimizatsii sudebnoy nagruzki. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa, 2019, no. 5, pp. 186—204. 
15. Sorokopud A. V. Pravovoe polozhenie pomoshchnika sud’i v grazhdanskom i arbitrazhnom sudoproizvodstve. Cand. diss. Moscow, 2021. 178 p. 
16. Khalatov S. A. Sokrashchenie kompetentsii sudov po razresheniyu besspornykh del kak faktor snizheniya nagruzki. Arbitrazhnyy i grazhdanskiy protsess, 2017, no. 12, pp. 40—42. 
17. Tsaregorodtseva E. A. K voprosu o vozmozhnosti peredachi del prikaznogo proizvodstva notariusam. Arbitrazhnyy i grazhdanskiy protsess, 2020, no. 3, pp. 24—27. 
18. Tsembelev N. Sh. Aktual’nye predposylki, osnovaniya i tezisy reorganizatsii sudebnogo prikaznogo proizvodstva. Ispolnitel’noe pravo, 2014, no. 2, pp. 36—38. 
19. Shtefan D. I. Protsess formirovaniya institutov sudebnoy sluzhby, problemy reformirovaniya. Yurist, 2021, no. 10, pp. 62—68.

Comments

No posts found

Write a review
Translate