We in a citing index:
THE INSTITUTE OF DISSENTING OPINION OF THE JUDGE IN CIVIL PROCEDURE AND ITS ROLE IN ENSURING UNITY OF JUDICIAL PRACTICE
THE INSTITUTE OF DISSENTING OPINION
OF THE JUDGE IN CIVIL PROCEDURE AND ITS ROLE
IN ENSURING UNITY OF JUDICIAL PRACTICE
A.I. POPOV,
Candidate of Legal Sciences, Assistant of the Department of Civil Procedure
of the Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University (Ukraine)
DOI: 10.24031/2226-0781-2019-9-4-153-174
The article is devoted to the functioning of the institution of the dissenting opinion of a judge in
civil proceedings. The doctrinal approaches to the disclosure of the legal nature of a dissenting
opinion, the existing models of dissent opinions in the global practice of justice, as well as the
evolution of the legal regulation of this institution in the civil procedural legislation of Ukraine
are analyzed. Taking into account the specifics of the functions of the Supreme Court as the
highest judicial body, and based on an analysis of the practice of considering civil cases in
cassation, the issues of the influence of the dissent opinions of the Supreme Court judges on
the law enforcement practice and ensuring the unity of judicial practice are examined. In
particular, the author expressed the view that the presence of a dissenting opinion attached
to the decision of the Supreme Court creates grounds for judges of other courts to depart from
the legal position set forth in such ruling and to apply a different law enforcement approach
proposed by the judge (judges) in the dissenting opinion. In addition, as a possible way of
influencing dissent opinions on the unity of judicial practice, it is seen that, along with the
existing “dissenting opinion” model, the “concurring opinion” model at which the judge who
decides to express it does not dispute the result consideration of the case (resolution), but at
the same time offers alternative approaches to law enforcement and the motivation of the
court decision.
Keywords: dissenting opinion; unity of judicial practice; principle of legal certainty;
Supreme Court; legal positions of the Supreme Court.
References
Bader Ginsburg R. The Role of Dissenting Opinions. URL: http://www.minnesotalawreview.
org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Ginsburg_MLR. pdf.
Basangov D.A. The Legal Nature of the Dissenting Opinion of the Judge of the Constitutional
Court of the Russian Federation. Journal of Russian Law, 2006, no. 2 (In Russian)
Bryntsev V. Doctrinal Interpretation of the Rules of Law in the Constitutional Proceeding.
Bulletin of the Academy of Legal Sciences of Ukraine, 2008, no. 4. (In Ukrainian)
Cherednichenko O.S. The Historical Process of Formation of a Dissenting Opinion
of a Judge as an Institution in the Criminal Justice System of Ukraine. In State and
Law. Legal and Political Sciences. Issue 49. Kiev: Institute of State and Law of NAS of
Ukraine, 2010. (In Ukrainian)
Deneka I.M. Some Features of the Institute of Dissenting Opinion. Humanitarian
and Legal Researches, 2014, no. 2. (In Russian)
Drozdov O. Success Fee of a Lawyer: International Experience and Prospects of Legislative
Regulation in Ukraine. URL: https://jurliga.ligazakon.net/analitycs/171358_
gonorar-uspkhu-advokata-svtoviy-dosvd--perspektivi-zakonodavchogo-vregulyuvannya-
v-ukran. (In Ukrainian)
Evseev A.P. The Argumentation Technique of the Supreme Court of Great Britain.
Comparative Constitutional Review, 2015, no. 3. (In Russian)
Gadzhiev G. Publication of a Dissenting Opinion of a Judge, or the History of the
Norm, Which Is the Tuning Fork of Judicial Reform in Russia. Digest. Constitutional
Justice in the CIS and Baltic Countries, 2006, no. 15. (In Russian)
Khotynska-Nor O. The Prospects for the Development of the Institute of Dissenting
Opinion in Civil Proceedings of Ukraine. Entrepreneurship, Economy and Law, 2018,
no. 8. (In Ukrainian)
Khrystova G.O. The Legal Nature of the Acts of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine:
Thesis for a Candidate Degree in Law Sciences. Kharkiv, 2004. (In Ukrainian)
Kibenko O.R. A Dissenting Opinion of a Judge of the Supreme Court is a Sabotage
or Heroic Deed? Legal Newspaper, 2018, no. 34. (In Ukrainian)
Kononov A.L. The Right to a Dissenting Opinion. Law, 2006, no. 11. (In Russian)
Krapivkina O.A. Dissenting Opinion of the Judge vs. Collegial Decision of the Court
or Individualism vs. Institutionalism. Herald of the Irkutsk State Technical University,
2012, no. 2. (In Russian)
Krapivkina O.A. The Dissenting Opinion of the Judge in the Genre Space of Judicial
Discourse. Bulletin of the Irkutsk State Technical University, 2010, no. 4. (In Russian)
Krapivkina O.A. The Nature of the Institution of a Dissenting Opinion in Different
Legal Systems. Herald of the Irkutsk State Technical University, 2015, no. 2. (In Russian)
Lylak D. The Institute of Dissenting Opinion in Constitutional Proceedings (Comparative
Analysis). Bulletin of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, 2011, no. 4–5. (In
Ukrainian)
Mamchenko N. Success Fee for a Lawyer: The KGS Supreme Court Commented on
its Position. Judicial and Legal Newspaper, 2018, no. 34–35. (In Russian)
Murtashina G.P. The Institute of Dissenting Opinion of a Judge in Civil Proceedings:
State and Problems. Bulletin of the Buryat State University, 2014, no. 2. (In Russian)
Nayfleysh V.D., Stepanova T.V. A Dissenting Opinion of a Judge of an Economic
Court. Bulletin of Economic Legal Proceedings, 2007, no. 5. (In Ukrainian)
Redfern А. Dissenting Opinions in International Commercial Arbitration: The Good,
the Bad and the Ugly. Arbitration International, 2004, vol. 20(3).
Stepanova T.V., Nayfleysh V.D. The Dissenting Opinion of a Judge as a Component
of Judge’s Discretion in Economic Legal Proceedings: Monograph. Odessa: Feniks,
2015. (In Ukrainian)
Ulturgashev P. Dissenting Opinions in Comparative Legal Context. Comparative
Constitutional Review, 2013, no. 6. (In Russian)
Vereshchagin A.N. Dissenting Opinions in the Russian Courts. Comparative Constitutional
Review, 2006, no. 4. (In Russian)
Vityuk R. Fee for Success. Bonus for a Lawyer or Corruption Component? Law and
Business, 2018, no. 31. (In Ukrainian)
Zolotova O.I. The Institute of the Dissenting Opinion of the Judge in Civil Proceedings
in the 18th–19th Centuries in Russia: A Historical and Legal View. Legal Researches,
2018, no. 1. (In Russian)
Information about the author
Popov A.I. (Kharkov, Ukraine) – Candidate of Legal Sciences, Assistant of the
Department of Civil Procedure of the Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University
(77 Pushkinskaya St., Kharkov, 61024, Ukraine; e-mail: [email protected]).
Recommended citation
Popov A.I. The Institute of Dissenting Opinion of the Judge in Civil Procedure and Its
Role in Ensuring Unity of Judicial Practice. Herald of Civil Procedure, 2019, vol. 9, no. 4,
p. 153–174. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.24031/2226-0781-2019-9-4-153-174
A.I. POPOV
Advertisement
Our partners
