Herald of Civil Procedure
EN
main-photo

We in a citing index:

IS IT POSSIBLE TO GRANT THE RECOVERER AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXECUTE JUDGMENT BY HIMSELF, IF THE DEBTOR AVOIDS PERFORMANCE?

JUDICIAL AUTHORITY AND PRACTICE


D.A. OLENIN

D.A. OLENIN,
Graduate Student, Faculty of Law,
National Research University Higher School of Economics, Deputy Head of the Unit,
Ministry of Justice of Russian Federation

https://doi.org/10.24031/2226-0781-2021-11-3-316-334

According to practice, it is often difficult for the claimant to get the execution of a court
decision containing non-property requirements. At the same time, the legal mechanism
of compulsory execution of non-property demands, which involves applying to the debtor
various indirect enforcement measures in the hope of getting him to enforce a court
decision, seems to be an inappropriate mechanism in terms of potential possibility of
replacing the non-property demand with its cash equivalent. The paper analyses the
application of the institution of changing the method and manner of a judicial act’s
execution as a mechanism that provides the recoverer with the opportunity to fulfill the
non-property requirements contained in the court decision by his own hands and for
account of the defective debtor. The author notes the spread of two opposite positions on the
issue in judicial practice and identifies the advantages and disadvantages of both of them.
The author also expresses his opinion regarding the procedure for the implementation
of the subjective civil right of the creditor to fulfill the obligation for account of the
defective debtor, provided by the article 397 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation,
in enforcement proceedings and concludes that the institution of changing the method
and manner of a judicial act’s execution is inadequate as a procedural mechanism for
such implementation.

Keywords: enforcement proceedings; non-property requirements; changing the method
and manner of a judicial act’s execution; civil procedure; ways of protecting civil rights;
Article 397 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

References

Galperin M.L. Budushchee ispolnitel’nogo proizvodstva: problemy vzaimodeystviia
material’nogo i protsessual’nogo prava [The Future of Enforcement Proceeding: Problems
of Cooperation Between the Substantial and Procedural Law]. Zakon – Law, 2012,
no. 4, pp. 40–57. (In Russ.)
Galperin M.L. Ispolnitel’noe proizvodstvo: uchebnik dlia bakalavriata i magistratury
[Enforcement Proceedings: Course Book for LLB and LLM]. Moscow: Iurait, 2018.
498 p. (In Russ.)
Galperin M.L. Nevozmozhnost’ ispolneniia trebovaniia ispolnitel’nogo dokumenta
v neizmennom vide: problema protsessual’nogo ili material’nogo prava? [Unavoidable
Alterations in Execution: Is the Challenge Procedural or Substantive?]. Zakon – Law,
2017, no. 7, pp. 27–40. (In Russ.)
Galperin M.L. Printsipy ispolnitel’nogo proizvodstva. Versiia 2.0 [Enforcement Principles.
Version 2.0]. Zakon – Law, 2017, no. 10, pp. 90–109. (In Russ.)
Gribanov V.P. Osushchestvlenie i zashchita grazhdanskikh prav [Exercising and Protecting
Civil Rights]. Moscow: Statut, 2001. 411 p. (In Russ.)
Gromov A.A. Vliianie nevozmozhnosti ispolneniia na pravo kreditora potrebovat’
ispolneniia obiazatel’stva v nature [The Influence of the Impossibility on the Creditor’s
Right to Claim Specific Performance]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo prava – Civil Law Review,
2016, no. 4, pp. 41–81. (In Russ.)
Iablochkov T.M. Uchebnik russkogo grazhdanskogo sudoproizvodstva [Textbook of
Russian Civil Proceedings]. Yaroslavl: I.K. Gassanov Publ., 1912. 336 p. (In Russ.)
Karapetov A.G. Isk o prisuzhdenii k ispolneniiu obiazatel’stva v nature [Claiming
Restitution in Kind]. Moscow: Statut, 2003. 190 p. (In Russ.)
Schwartz M.Z. Nekotorye diskussionnye voprosy ispolneniia trebovanii neimushchestvennogo
kharaktera v ramkakh ispolnitel’nogo proizvodstva [Some Debating Points of
Execution of Requirements of Non-Property Character within Executive Proceeding].
In Aristov D.V., Gureev V.A. (eds.). Poriadok ispolneniia trebovanii neimushchestvennogo
kharaktera, soderzhashchihsia v ispolnitel’nykh dokumentakh: problemnye voprosy i puti
ikh resheniya: sbornik materialov Mezhdunarodnoi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii
[The Order of Enforcement of Non-Property Demands Contained in Enforcement Documents:
Problematic Issues and Ways of Their Solution: Collection of Publications of the
International Scientific Conference]. Moscow: Statut, 2017. P. 279–286. (In Russ.)
Valeev D.Kh., Chelyshev M.Yu. (eds.). Ispolnitel’noe proizvodstvo: protsessual’naia
priroda i tsivilisticheskie osnovy [Enforcement Proceedings: Procedural Nature and Civil
Law Fundamentals]. Moscow: Statut, 2007. 140 p. (In Russ.)
Valeev D.Kh., Chelyshev M.Yu. Grazhdansko-pravovye sredstva v protsessual’nom
mekhanizme realizatsii prav grazhdan i organizatsii v ispolnitel’nom proizvodstve [Civil
Remedies in the Procedural Mechanism for Implementing the Rights of Citizens and
Organizations in Enforcement Proceedings]. Ispolnitel’noe pravo – Enforcement Law,
2009, no. 4, pp. 12–16. (In Russ.)

Information about the author

D.A. Olenin (Moscow, Russia) – Graduate Student, Faculty of Law, National
Research University Higher School of Economics, Deputy Head of the Unit, Ministry
of Justice of Russian Federation (11 Pokrovskii Blvd., Moscow, 109028, Russia; e-mail:
olenin.dmitry@gmail.com).

Recommended citation

Olenin D.A. Mozhno li predostavit’ vzyskateliu pravo samomu ispolnit’ reshenie suda,
esli dolzhnik ot ispolneniia ukloniaetsia? [Is It Possible to Grant the Recoverer an Opportunity
to Execute Judgment by Himself, If the Debtor Avoids Performance?]. Vestnik
grazhdanskogo protsessa – Herald of Civil Procedure, 2021, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 316–334.
(In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24031/2226-0781-2021-11-3-316-334

 el_.png   it_.png   book.png

Keywords