We in a citing index:
EVIDENCE IN COURTS OF CASSATION AND SUPERVISORY INSTANCE
EVIDENCE IN COURTS
OF CASSATION AND SUPERVISORY INSTANCE
L.A. TEREKHOVA,
Doctor of Legal Sciences, Professor,
Head of the Department of Civil and Arbitration Procedure
of the Dostoevsky Omsk State University
The article deals with the process of proving in the courts of cassation and supervisory
instances; determines the constituent parts of the subject of proof, including the facts
indicated in the arguments of the complaint; the facts indicated in the objections; and
the facts, the need to establish which is determined by the court. The presence of such
a stage in the activity of the courts of cassation and the supervisory instances as filtering
of complaints significantly affects the evidentiary activity. The lack of information in the
complaint on the significant violations of the legal norms that affected the outcome of the
case, with arguments for such violations, will not entail for the person filing the complaint
consequences in the form of return of his complaint. However, this may lead to more serious
consequences when the judge in charge of filtering of complaints does not establish significant
violations of law and, as a result, denies the person the transfer of his complaint with the
case to a court hearing on the merits. As criteria for the admissibility of a complaint, judges
should be guided by the grounds for decisions quashing in cassation (supervisory) instances.
These grounds constitute a peculiar link between fact proving during the filtering stage
and the main evidentiary activity related to the complaint consideration on the merits.
The courts of cassation and supervisory instances do not accept and do not examine new
evidence, however, it is impossible to completely exclude the presence thereof, since the
persons participating in the case present their explanations during the court hearing and
provide for new reasoning. The task of the cassation (supervisory) instance is to check the
correctness of the determination by the lower courts of the subject of proof, compliance
with the evidentiary rules and the accuracy of the application of law to the circumstances
of the case.
Keywords: evidence; proof; subject of proof; cassation instance; supervisory instance;
admissibility of the complaint; complaints filtering; judicial errors.
References
Baulin O.V. Ustanovlenie obstoyatel’stv dela – sostavnaya chast’ sudebnogo dokazyvaniya
[Establishing the Circumstances of the Case is an Integral Part of Judicial Evidence].
In Teoreticheskie i prakticheskie problemy grazhdanskogo, arbitrazhnogo protsessa
i ispolnitel’nogo proizvodstva [Theoretical and Practical Problems of Civil, Arbitration
and Enforcement Proceedings]. Krasnodar; St. Petersburg, 2005. (In Russian)
Deryushkina T.A. Protsessualnyj rezhim deyatel’nosti arbitrazhnogo suda kassatsionnoj
instantsii: Dis. … kand. yurid. nauk [The Procedural Regime of the Arbitration Court of
Cassation: Thesis for a Candidate Degree in Law Sciences]. Samara, 2003. (In Russian)
Fokina M.A. Mekhanizm dokazyvaniya po grazhdanskim delam: teoretiko-prikladnye
problemy [The Mechanism of Evidence in Civil Cases: Theoretical and Applied Problems].
Moscow, 2010. (In Russian)
Fokina M.A. Sudebnyj kontrol’ i protsessual’noe sotrudnichestvo po grazhdanskim
delam [Judicial Review and Procedural Cooperation in Civil Cases]. In Teoreticheskie
i prakticheskie problemy grazhdanskogo, arbitrazhnogo protsessa i ispolnitel’nogo proizvodstva
[Theoretical and Practical Problems of Civil, Arbitration and Enforcement Proceedings].
Krasnodar; St. Petersburg, 2005. (In Russian)
Komissarov K.I. Realizatsia teorii dokazyvania v sudebnoj praktike po grazhdanskim
delam [The Implementation of the Theory of Evidence in Judicial Practice in Civil
Cases]. In Realizatsiya protsessual’nykh norm organami grazhdanskoj yurisdiktsii [The
Implementation of Procedural Rules by the Bodies of Civil Jurisdiction]. Sverdlovsk,
1988. (In Russian)
Osokina G.L. Grazhdanskij protsess. Obschaya chast’ [Civil Procedure. General Part].
Moscow, 2003. (In Russian)
Terekhova L.A. Pravo na ispravlenie sudebnoj oshibki kak komponent sudebnoj zashchity:
Dis. … dokt. yurid. nauk [The Right to Correct Judicial Errors as a Component
of Judicial Protection: Thesis for a Doctor Degree in Law Sciences]. Yekaterinburg,
2008. (In Russian)
Yarkov V.V. Yuridicheskie fakty v thivilisticheskom protsesse [Legal Facts in Civil Procedure].
Moscow, 2012. (In Russian)
Information about the author
Terekhova L.A. (Omsk, Russia) – Doctor of Legal Sciences, Professor, Head of the
Department of Civil and Arbitration Procedure of the Dostoevsky Omsk State University
(100/1 50 Let Profsoyuzov St., Omsk, 644065, Russia; e-mail: [email protected]).
Recommended citation
Terekhova L.A. Dokazyvanie v sudakh kassatsionnoj i nadzornoj instantsij [Evidence
in Courts of Cassation and Supervisory Instance]. Вестник гражданского процесса =
Herald of Civil Procedure, 2019, no. 1, p. 157–169. (In Russian) DOI: 10.24031/2226-
0781-2019-9-1-157-169
L.A. TEREKHOVA
Advertisement
Our partners
