We in a citing index:
ARBITRATION FLASH JUSTICE?
ARBITRATION FLASH JUSTICE?
A.R. SULTANOV,
Head of the Legal Department, PJSC “Nizhnekamskneftekhim”
https://doi.org/10.24031/2226-0781-2021-11-1-60-77
In this article, the author attempts to comprehensively consider such a concept as “flash justice”.
The study of this concept, new for Russian science, takes place through the prism of law
enforcement practice and the use of many illustrative examples of judicial acts, interviews
with representatives of the judicial system and other sources of information. The mentioned
phenomenon is considered and evaluated from the point of view of not only civil and arbitration,
but also criminal proceedings, where examples are more colorful and clear. The author
also cites foreign, in particular English, legal experience as an example. Thus, it is noted that
a draft judicial act can be prepared by both the court staff, and its individual provisions can
be prepared by the parties. At the same time, the existing guarantees related to the prevention
of misleading the judge, as the author notes, contribute to the formulation of the draft court
decision, which reflects only the objective facts established by the court and meets the criteria
of truth and legality. Also, the article indirectly touches on certain retrospective aspects related
to the development of the institution of judicial decision, as well as its transformations in
the light of the changing external conditions of the administration of justice.
Keywords: civil procedure; arbitration procedure; justice; court decision; reasoning for the
decision; criminal proceedings.
References
Benedskaia O.A. Preiuditsiia v arbitrazhnykh i treteiskikh sudakh: teoreticheskie
i prikladnye problemy v svete zapreta zloupotrebleniia protsessual’nymi pravami [Prejudice
in Arbitration Courts: Theoretical and Applied Problems in the Light of the Prohibition
of Abuse of Procedural Rights]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa – Herald of
Civil Procedure, 2019, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 216–235. (In Russ.)
Kulikov V. Spisyvat’ nel’zia. Sudam zapretili kopirovat’ obvineniia sledstviia v prigovorakh
[It Is Impossible to Write Off. The Courts Were Forbidden to Copy the Accusations
of the Investigation in the Sentences]. Rossiiskaia gazeta – Rossiyskaya Gazeta,
24 August 2020, no. 188(8242). (In Russ.)
Kulikov V. Sud onlain. Arbitrazh nachal priem elektronnykh iskov [Court Online.
Arbitration Began Accepting Electronic Claims]. Rossiiskaia gazeta – Rossiyskaya Gazeta,
21 January 2011, no. 11(5387). (In Russ.)
Osokina G.L. Grazhdanskii protsess. Osobennaia chast’ [Civil Procedure. The Special
Part]. Moscow: Norma, 2007. 960 p. (In Russ.)
Rozhkova M.A., Glazkova M.E. Aspekty prava na sud: noveishie tendentsii [Aspects
of the Right to Court: Recent Trends]. In Rossiiskii ezhegodnik Evropeiskoi konventsii po
pravam cheloveka [Russian Yearbook of the European Convention on Human Rights].
Moscow: Statut, 2015. Vyp. 1: Evropeiskaia konventsiia: novye «starye» prava [Issue 1:
European Convention: New “Old” Rights], pp. 180–229. (In Russ.)
Sakhnova T.V. Kurs grazhdanskogo protsessa [Course of Civil Procedure]. 2nd ed.
Moscow: Statut, 2014. 784 p. (In Russ.)
Shakarian M.S. (ed.). Kommentarii k Grazhdanskomu protsessual’nomu kodeksu RF
[Commentary on the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation]. Moscow: Prospekt,
2007. 816 p. (In Russ.)
Silver J.S. Equality of Arms and the Adversarial Process: A New Constitutional Right.
Wisconsin Law Review, 1990, рр. 1007–1041.
Sultanov A.R. Bezuslovnoe bezobrazie, ili iavliaetsia li polnoe kopirovanie teksta vozrazhenii
dopustimym v kachestve sudebnogo resheniia? [Unconditional Disgrace, or Is
Full Copying of the Objection Text Acceptable as a Court Decision?]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo
protsessa – Herald of Civil Procedure, 2017, no. 5, pp. 264–282. (In Russ.)
Sultanov A.R. Dolzhnaia pravovaia protsedura i pravovye standarty Evropeiskogo
Suda po pravam cheloveka [Due Procedure and Legal Standards of the European
Court of Human Rights]. Evraziiskaia advokatura – Eurasian Advocacy, 2013, no. 1(2),
pp. 62–65. (In Russ.)
Sultanov A.R. K 15-i godovshchine deistviia Evropeiskoi konventsii o zashchite prav
cheloveka i osnovnykh svobod ot 4 noiabria 1950 goda i protokolov k nei [To the 15th Anniversary
of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental
Freedoms of 4 November 1950 and the Protocols Thereto]. Iuridicheskie nauki
i obrazovanie – Legal Science and Education, 2013, no. 39, pp. 117–130. (In Russ.)
Sultanov A.R. Komu mozhno zaiavit’ vstrechnyi isk, ili tolkovanie, ogranichivaiushchee
sredstva zashchity [Who You Can File a Counterclaim To, or an Interpretation Limiting
the Remedies]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa – Herald of Civil Procedure, 2017,
no. 6, pp. 225–246. (In Russ.)
Sultanov A.R. Kopipast kak otkaz v pravosudii [Copy-Paste as a Denial of Justice].
Evraziiskaia advokatura – Eurasian Advocacy, 2017, no. 5, pp. 40–44. (In Russ.)
Sultanov A.R. Manipuliatsii s podsudnost’iu [Manipulations with Jurisdiction].
Zakon – Law, 2008, no. 9, pp. 103–119. (In Russ.)
Sultanov A.R. Posledstviia lzhi v protsesse i material’nom prave [Consequences of
Lies in Procedure and Material Law]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa – Herald of Civil
rocedure, 2019, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 230–262. (In Russ.)
Sultanov A.R. Spornye voprosy primeneniia srokov davnosti privlecheniia k otvetstvennosti
za nalogovye pravonarusheniia [Controversial Issues of Application of Statute of
Limitations for Bringing to Responsibility for Tax Offenses]. Iuridicheskie nauki i obrazovanie
– Legal Science and Education, 2016, no. 46, pp. 221–275. (In Russ.)
Vasiaev A.A. Mozhet li schitat’sia sud nezavisimym, esli tekst prigovora povtoriaet tekst
obvinitel’nogo zakliucheniia (akta)? [Can a Court Be Considered Independent if the Text
of the Judgment Repeats the Text of the Indictment (Act)?]. In Ugolovno-protsessual’nye
i kriminalisticheskie chteniia: materialy mezhdunar. nauch.-prakt. internet-konferentsii,
Irkutsk, 16–30 aprelia 2012 g. [Criminal Procedural and Criminalistic Readings: Materials
of the International Scientific-Practical Internet Conference, Irkutsk, 16–30 April
2012]. Irkutsk: Baikal State University of Economics and Law Publishing House, 2012,
pp. 7–9. (In Russ.)
Zhilin G.A. (ed.). Kommentarii k Grazhdanskomu protsessual’nomu kodeksu RF
[Commentary on the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation]. Moscow: Prospekt;
ТК Velbi, 2003. 731 p. (In Russ.)
Zhuikov V.M., Puchinskii V.K., Treushnikov M.K. (eds.). Nauchno-prakticheskii
kommentarii k Grazhdanskomu protsessual’nomu kodeksu RF [Scientific and Practical
Commentary on the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation]. Moscow: Gorodets,
2003. 1008 p. (In Russ.)
Information about the author
A.R. Sultanov (Nizhnekamsk, Russia) – Head of the Legal Department, PJSC
“Nizhnekamskneftekhim” (PJSC “Nizhnekamskneftekhim”, Nizhnekamsk, 423574, Russia;
e-mail: [email protected]).
Recommended citation
Sultanov A.R. Arbitrazhnoe flesh-pravosudie? [Arbitration Flash Justice?]. Vestnik
grazhdanskogo protsessa – Herald of Civil Procedure, 2021, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 60–77. (In
Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24031/2226-0781-2021-11-1-60-77
A.R. SULTANOV
Advertisement
Our partners
