We in a citing index:
THE NORMATIVELY FIXED “CRITERIA” OF QUALIFIED LEGAL ASSISTANCE IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS AND ARBITRATION PROCEDURE ARE ON THE AGENDA (IN THE LIGHT OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION OF 16 JULY 2020 NO. 37-P)
THE NORMATIVELY FIXED “CRITERIA” OF QUALIFIED LEGAL
ASSISTANCE IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS AND ARBITRATION PROCEDURE
ARE ON THE AGENDA (IN THE LIGHT OF THE RESOLUTION
OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
OF 16 JULY 2020 NO. 37-P)
D.I. BEKYASHEVA,
Candidate of Legal Sciences, Associate Professor,
Faculty of Law, National Research University Higher School of Economics
DOI: 10.24031/2226-0781-2020-10-6-101-113
The experience of creating professionally oriented legal proceedings is not new (besides, it is
far from positive) for arbitration procedure, which, once again addressing this issue, required
the legislator to thoroughly study, at least, that had already happened in this regard – the
practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. While recognizing the existence
of two mutually exclusive provisions that appeared in one Resolution of the Constitutional
Court of the Russian Federation (from 16 July 2004 No. 15-P), we still cannot but
come to the sad conclusion that when establishing restrictions on judicial representatives,
none of the conclusions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation is so was not
accounted for. At the same time, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation itself,
in its own Resolution of 16 July 2020 No. 37-P, where the qualified legal assistance provided
was checked (Federal Law of 28 November 2018 No. 451-FZ), states the presence of
a minimum standard, which externally appears as a forecast of an alleged additional (possibly
more close) attention to the set of criteria for a professional representative, but from
the inside – this argument of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation is just an
aporia, a logically correct conclusion, which is still unable to exist in reality.
Keywords: arbitration procedure; civil procedure; qualified legal assistance.
References
Borisova E.A. Snizhenie sudebnoi nagruzki stavitsia vo glavu preobrazovanii protsessual’nogo
zakonodatel’stva [Reducing the Judicial Burden Is Placed at the Head of
the Transformation of Procedural Legislation]. URL: https://www.garant.ru/interview/
1144157/. (In Russ.)
Ermoshin G.T., Adzinova E.A. Razvitie v zakonodatel’stve o sudebnoi vlasti konstitutsionnogo
prava na sudebnuiu zashchitu v ekonomicheskoi sfere [Development in the
Legislation on the Judiciary of the Constitutional Right to Judicial Protection in the
Economic Sphere]. Zakonodatel’stvo i ekonomika – Legislation and Economics, 2004,
no. 11, pp. 78–90. (In Russ.)
Fomina O.Iu. Professional’noe predstavitel’stvo: dovody za i protiv [Professional Representation:
Pros and Cons]. Aktual’nye problemy rossiiskogo prava – Actual Problems
of Russian Law, 2019, no. 2, pp. 95–101. (In Russ.)
Muradian E.M. Istina kak problema sudebnogo prava [Truth as a Problem of Judicial
Law]. Moscow: Bylina, 2002. 287 p. (In Russ.)
Prikhodko I.A., Bondarenko A.V., Stoliarenko V.M. Reformirovanie protsessual’nogo
zakonodatel’stva: tseli, problemy, tendentsii [Reforming Procedural Legislation: Goals,
Problems, Trends]. Moscow: Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniia, 2018. 624 p. (In Russ.)
Prokudina L.A. Predstavitel’stvo v arbitrazhnom protsesse (voprosy professionalizatsii)
[Representation in Arbitration Procedure (Professionalization Issues)]. Arbitrazhnyi i grazhdanskii
protsess – Arbitration and Civil Procedure, 2009, no. 1, рр. 14–18. (In Russ.)
Rumak V. Tak nazyvaemaia optimizatsiia – eto put’ v nikuda [Interv’iu s V.M. Zhuikovym]
[The So-Called Optimization Is a Road to Nowhere [Interview with V.M. Zhuikov]].
Zakon – Law, 2018, no. 1, pp. 6–17. (In Russ.)
Rusinova E.R., Chudinovskaia N.A. Osobennosti predstavitel’stva po delam «neiskovykh
» proizvodstv v grazhdanskom protsesse [Peculiarities of Representation in Cases
of “Non-Litigation” Proceedings in Civil Procedure]. Rossiiskii iuridicheskii zhurnal –
Russian Legal Journal, 2019, no. 6, pp. 79–87. (In Russ.)
Sakhnova T.V. O kontseptsii grazhdanskogo protsessa i protsessual’nogo zakonodatel’stva
[On the Concept of Civil Procedure and Procedural Legislation]. In Sovremennaia doktrina
grazhdanskogo, arbitrazhnogo protsessa i ispolnitel’nogo proizvodstva: teoriia i praktika:
sbornik nauchnykh statei [Modern Doctrine of Civil, Arbitration and Enforcement
Proceedings: Theory and Practice: Collection of Scientific Articles]. Krasnodar;
St. Petersburg: Iuridicheskii tsentr Press, 2004, рр. 67–78. (In Russ.)
Shakhrai S.M., Krakovskii K.P. Sud skoryi, pravyi, milostivyi i ravnyi dlia vsekh.
K 150-letiiu Sudebnoi reformy v Rossii [Fast, Right, Merciful and Equal Judgment for
All. On the 150th Anniversary of Judicial Reform in Russia]. Moscow: Kuchkovo pole,
2014. 536 p. (In Russ.)
Sherstiuk V.M. Otritsanie otritsaniia v arbitrazhnom protsessual’nom zakonodatel’stve
[Denial of Denial in Arbitration Procedural Law]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa –
Herald of Civil Procedure, 2014, no. 2, pp. 11–42. (In Russ.)
Sherstiuk V.M. Razvitie printsipa sostiazatel’nosti v arbitrazhnom protsesse [Development
of the Adversarial Principle in Arbitration Procedure]. In Treushnikov M.K. (ed.).
Uchenye-iuristy MGU o sovremennom prave [Moscow State University Legal Scholars
on Modern Law]. Moscow: Gorodets, 2005, рр. 237–266. (In Russ.)
Smagina E.S. Ispol’zovanie informatsionnykh tehnologii kak al’ternativa masshtabnym
izmeneniiam grazhdanskogo protsessual’nogo zakonodatel’stva, napravlennym na povyshenie
effektivnosti grazhdanskogo sudoproizvodstva i optimizatsiiu sudebnoi nagruzki
[The Use of Information Technology as an Alternative to Large-Scale Changes in Civil
Procedural Legislation Aimed at Increasing the Efficiency of Civil Proceedings and
Optimizing the Judicial Burden]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa – Herald of Civil Procedure,
2018, no. 1, pp. 51–59. (In Russ.)
Treushnikov M.K. (ed.). Put’ k zakonu (iskhodnye dokumenty, poiasnitel’nye zapiski,
materialy konferentsii, varianty proektov GPK, novyi GPK RF) [The Path to the Law
(Source Documents, Explanatory Notes, Conference Proceedings, Draft Versions of
the Code of Civil Procedure, the New Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation)].
Moscow: Gorodets, 2004. 1024 p. (In Russ.)
Information about the author
D.I. Bekyasheva (Moscow, Russia) – Candidate of Legal Sciences, Associate Professor,
Faculty of Law, National Research University Higher School of Economics (11 Pokrovsky
Blvd., Moscow, 109028, Russia; e-mail: [email protected]).
Recommended citation
Bekyasheva D.I. Na povestke – normativno zakreplennye «kriterii» kvalifitsirovannoi
iuridicheskoi pomoshchi v grazhdanskom sudoproizvodstve i arbitrazhnom protsesse
(v svete postanovleniia KS RF ot 16 iiulia 2020 № 37-P) [The Normatively Fixed “Criteria”
of Qualified Legal Assistance in Civil Proceedings and Arbitration Procedure are on
the Agenda (in the Light of the Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian
Federation of 16 July 2020 No. 37-P)]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa – Herald of Civil
Procedure, 2020, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 101–113. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24031/2226-
0781-2020-10-6-101-113
D.I. BEKYASHEVA
Advertisement
Our partners
