main-photo

We in a citing index:

IS THE “PROCEDURAL REVOLUTION” COMPLETED?

IS THE “PROCEDURAL REVOLUTION” COMPLETED?

E.S. SMAGINA,

Candidate of Legal Sciences, Associate Professor,

Head of the Department of Civil Procedure and Labor Law

of the Southern Federal University

DOI: 10.24031/2226-0781-2019-9-4-113-123

The article discusses the grounds, goals and some results of the reform of procedural legislation

under the Federal Law of 28 November 2018 No. 451-FZ. The author identifies the main

factors that determine the nature of changes, defines the problems of applying new norms, and

assesses their possible impact on civil procedure and the development of the judicial system. The

ongoing changes in procedural legislation are aimed at rejecting a number of basic procedural

institutions, which makes possible to call this process revolutionary. The changes were not

accepted by scholars and practitioners, but the discussion of the professional community and

the legislator did not bring significant results. The goal of the reform, pursued by the initiators

of the “revolution” is simplification, speeding up the procedure and it has been established, but

the means and the order of achieving it, according to the author, are not so straightforward.

It seems that Federal Law No. 451 represents only a compromise stage of major changes in

procedural legislation, and the end of the procedural revolution is not close yet.

Keywords: jurisdiction; disclosure of evidence; time limits for consideration of cases; courts

of appeal; cassation courts.

References

Borisova E.A. Reducing the Judicial Burden Is Put at the Forefront of the Transformation

of Procedural Legislation. URL: http://www.garant.ru/interview/1144157/. (In Russian)

Legislative Initiatives of the Supreme Court – Personal Proposals of Lebedev. URL:

https://www.law.ru/news/19678-u-verhovnogo-suda-net-kontseptsii-sudebnoy-reformy.

(In Russian)

Smagina E.S. The Creation of Courts of Appeal of General Jurisdiction: The Ratio of Judicial

and Arbitral Innovations. Arbitration and Civil Procedure, 2017, no. 10. (In Russian)

Tay Yu.V. Procedural Reform... Three in a Boat. We Do Not Consider the Consequences.

URL: https://zakon.ru/blog/2017/10/2/processualnaya_reforma_troe_v_lodke_ne_schitaem_

posledstvij. (In Russian)

Tumanov D.A., Streltsova E.G., Moiseev S.V., Alekhina S.A., Bardin L.N., Kazikhanova S.S.,

Nakhova E.A., Nevsky I.A., Nenashev M.M., Prokudina L.A., Smagina E.S., Sultanov A.R.,

Chistyakova O.P. Collective Legal Conclusion on the Draft Law of the Supreme Court of

the Russian Federation on Amendments to the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation,

to the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and to the Code of

Administrative Proceedings of the Russian Federation and Individual Conclusions of

Scholars and Practicians. Herald of Civil Procedure, 2018, no. 1. (In Russian)

Vyacheslav Lebedev: Cassation Should Only Be Continuous. URL: https://pravo.

ru/news/201658/. (In Russian)

Yarkov V.V. Procedural Reform Project: Quo Vadis? Arbitration and Civil Procedure,

2017, no. 12. (In Russian)

Information about the author

Smagina E.S. (Rostov-on-Don, Russia) – Candidate of Legal Sciences, Associate

Professor, Head of the Department of Civil Procedure and Labor Law of the Southern

Federal University (88 M. Gorky St., Rostov-on-Don, 344007, Russia; e-mail: esmagina@

yandex.ru).

Recommended citation

Smagina E.S. Is the “Procedural Revolution” Completed? Herald of Civil Procedure, 2019,

vol. 9, no. 4, p. 113–123. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.24031/2226-0781-2019-9-4-113-123

E.S. SMAGINA