Вестник гражданского процесса
RU
main-photo

Наши индексы цитирования:

ПРАВОВАЯ ПРИРОДА СПОСОБОВ ПРАВОВОЙ ЗАЩИТЫ ЧЕРЕЗ ПРИЗМУ МЕЖДУНАРОДНОГО ГРАЖДАНСКОГО ПРОЦЕССА

ИНОСТРАННЫЙ ГРАЖДАНСКИЙ ПРОЦЕСС


В.Н. КОСЦОВ

В.Н. КОСЦОВ,
магистр частного права, аспирант департамента международного права
факультета права Национального исследовательского университета
«Высшая школа экономики»

https://doi.org/10.24031/2226-0781-2021-11-4-179-228

В статье обосновывается правовая природа защиты права в качестве комплекс-
ного явления, находящегося на стыке материального и процессуального права, на
примере споров с иностранным элементом как ситуации, в которой процессуаль-
ная или материальная квалификация правовых понятий имеет непосредствен-
ные практические последствия. Автор делает вывод о том, что при разреше-
нии вопросов, касающихся способов правовой защиты, суду следует кумулятивно
применять как материальное право, так и процессуальное право. При этом для
правовой квалификации конкретных норм следует использовать телеологический
критерий процессуальной цели, в то время как иные критерии, включая тексту-
альное толкование норм права, подвергаются критике. В статье также рассма-
тривается ряд практических казусов, которые могут быть разрешены на основе
предлагаемого подхода к квалификации способов правовой защиты. В частно-
сти, описываемый в статье подход позволяет разрешать ситуации, когда тот
или иной способ защиты допускается по иностранному материальному праву,
но входит в противоречие с процессуальным инструментарием по праву суда
(lex fori). Предлагаемый подход также потенциально эффективен в ходе транс-
национального исполнительного производства, позволяя, в частности, обосно-
вать возможность адаптации резолютивной части исполняемого судебного или
арбитражного решения к процессуальной традиции lex fori.

Ключевые слова: способы правовой защиты; международный гражданский про-
цесс; критерий процессуальной квалификации правовых понятий; право, приме-
нимое к способам правовой защиты; коллизия способов защиты по применимому
праву и по праву суда; транснациональное исполнительное производство; меж-
дународный арбитраж.

References

Ailes E. Substance and Procedure in the Conflict of Laws. Michigan Law Review,
1941, vol. 39(3), pp. 392–418.
Annen C., Schmidt F. Suum cuique – Das Verhältnis zwischen staatlichem Urkundsprozess
und Schiedsverfahren. SchiedsVZ, 2007, pp. 304–311.
Arnold T.W. The Role of Substantive Law and Procedure in the Legal Process. URL:
https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/4258/.
Ashford P. Remedies (Other Than Damages). In Handbook on International Commercial
Arbitration. URL: https://arbitrationlaw.com/library/chapter-40-remediesother-
damages-handbook-international-commercial-arbitration-second.
Asoskov A.V. Opredelenie prava, podlezhashchego primeneniu k forme sdekli [Law
Applicable to Form of Transactions]. Vestnik ekonomicheskogo pravosudiia RF – Bulletin
of Economic Justice of the Russian Federation, 2014, no. 9, pp. 107–133. (In Russ.)
Asoskov A.V. Osnovy kollizionnogo prava [Fundamentals of Conflict of Laws]. Moscow:
M-Logos, 2017. 352 p. (In Russ.)
Avtonova E.D., Astapenko P.A., Boreisho D.V., Do M.Iu., Malshakov A.A., Mymrin V.A.,
Nikulushkina A.S., Papilin I.I., Romanova O.I., Khodasevich L.S. Kommentarii r Postanovleniiu
Plenuma VS RF ot 25.12.2018 № 49 «O nekotorykh voprosakh primeneniia
obshchikh polozhenii Grazhdanskogo kodeksa Rossiiskoi Federatsii o zakliuchenii i tolkovanii
dogovora» [Commentary to the Plenary Ruling of the Russian Supreme Court of
25 December 2018 No. 49 “On Certain Aspects of the Application of General Provisions
of the Russian Civil Code on the Formation of Contracts and Contract Interpretation”].
Vestnik ekonomicheskogo pravosudiia RF – Bulletin of Economic Justice of the Russian Federation,
2019, no. 9, pp. 68–118; no. 10, pp. 137–191; no. 11, pp. 71–125. (In Russ.)
Beaumont P., Walker L. Recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and
commercial matters in the Brussels I Recast and some lessons from it and the recent
Hague Conventions for the Hague Judgments Project. Journal of Private International
Law, 2015, vol. 11(1), pp. 31–63.
Berger K. International Economic Arbitration. Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers,
1993. 939 p.
Berger K. Power of Arbitrators to Fill Gaps and Revise Contracts to Make Sense.
Arbitration International, 2001, vol. 17(1), pp. 1–18.
Bevzenko R.S., Fakhretdinov T.R. Iuridicheskaia priroda predvaritel’noi platy po grazhdansko-
pravovomu dogovoru [Legal Nature of Advance Payment Under a Civil Contract].
Zakonodatel’stvo – Legislation, 2005, no. 3, pp. 6–14. (In Russ.)
Briggs A. Conflict of Laws and Commercial Remedies. In Burrows A., Peel E. (eds.).
Commercial Remedies Current Issues and Problems. Oxford University Press, 2013,
pp. 271–278.
Brunner C. Force Majeure and Hardship Under General Contract Principles: Exemption
for Non-Performance in International Arbitration. Kluwer Law International,
2009. 589 p.
Bühler M., Cartier M. Chapter 12: Recognition and Enforcement of Awards // Arbitration
in Switzerland: The Practitioner’s Guide / Ed. by M. Arroyo. Kluwer Law International,
2013, pp. 1285–1322.
Castel & Walker: Canadian Conflict of Laws. 6th ed. LexisNexis, 2005.
Castel J.G. Procedure and the Conflict of Laws. McGill Law Journal, 1970, vol. 16(4),
pp. 603–632.
Cavers D. A Critique of the Choice-of-Law Problem. Harvard Law Review, 1933,
vol. 47, pp. 173–208.
Chappuis C. A Comparative Overview on Performance as a Remedy: A Key to Divergent
Approaches. In Schneider M., Knoll J. (eds.). Performance as a Remedy: Non-Monetary
Relief in International Arbitration: ASA Special Series No. 30. Juris Publishing,
2011, pp. 51–91.
Cheshire, North & Fawcett: Private International Law / Ed. by P. Torremans et al.
Oxford University Press, 2015. 1632 p.
Chirninov A.M. Bremya dokazyvaniia v konstitutsionnom sudebnom protsesse Rossii
i SHSHA [Burden of proof in constitutional justice of Russia and the U.S.]. Sravnitelnoe
konstitutsionnoe obozrenie – Comparative Constitutional Review, 2018, no. 6, pp. 101–
116. (In Russ.)
Conflict of Laws: Application of Foreign Remedies. Duke Law Journal, 1961, no. 2,
pp. 316–322.
Cook W. “Substance” and “Procedure” in the Conflict of Laws. Yale Law Journal, 1933,
vol. 42(3), pp. 333–358.
Dicey, Morris & Collins on the Conflict of Laws. 15th ed. Sweet & Maxwell, 2018. 1602 p.
Dozhdev D.V. Ispolneniie obiazatel’stva v nature: vozrozhdenie dogovornoi distsipliny
v postsovetskom obiazatel’stvennom prave ili novoe opredelenie tsennosti obiazatel’stva
[Specific Performance: Revival of Contractual Discipline in Post-Soviet Law of Obligations
or Re-Exploration of the Meaning of a Legal Obligation]. In Problemy postsovetskoi
teorii i filosofii prava: perspektivy svobodnogo obshchestva: sbornik statei [Issues
of Post-Soviet Theory and Philosophy of Law: Perspective for a Free Society: Collected
Papers]. Moscow: Iurlitinform, 2018, pp. 90–128. (In Russ.)
Elder T. The Case Against Arbitral Awards of Specific Performance in Transnational
Commercial Disputes. Arbitration International, 1997, vol. 13(1), pp. 1–32.
Eliseev N.G., Vershinina E.V. Mezhdunarodnoe grazhdanskoe protsessualnoe pravo:
uchebnoe posobie [International Civil Procedural Law] Moscow: Prospekt, 2011.
240 p. (In Russ.)
Erokhova M.A. O sudebnoi neustoike v rossiiskom prave. Analiz praktiki 2015–2017
[Judicial Penalty in Russian Law. Practice Analysis for 2015–2017]. Vestnik ekonomicheskogo
pravosudiia RF – Bulletin of Economic Justice of the Russian Federation, 2017,
no. 7, pp. 97–111. (In Russ.)
Ferrario P. The Adaptation of Long-Term Gas Sale Agreements by Arbitrators. Kluwer
Law International, 2017. 240 p.
Fokina M.A. (ed.). Kurs dokazatel’stvennogo prava: Grazhdanskii protsess. Arbitrazhnyi
protsess. Administrativnoe sudoproizvodstvo [Law of Evidence: Civil Procedure. Commercial
Procedure. Administrative Procedure]. Moscow: Statut, 2019. 656 p. (In Russ.)
Franzina P., De Miguel Asensio P., Cuniberti G., Heinze C., Requejo Isidro M. The Hague
Conference on Private International Law “Judgments Convention”. URL: https://www.europarl.
europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2018/604954/IPOL_STU(2018)604954_EN.pdf.
Galperin M.L. Budushchee ispolntitel’nogo proizvodstva: problemy vzaimodeistviia
material’nogo i protsessual’nogo prava [The Future of Enforcement Law: Interplay
Between Substance and Procedure]. Zakon – Law, 2012, no. 4, pp. 40–57. (In Russ.)
Galperin M.L. Ispolnitel’noe proizvodstvo: uchebnik dlia vuzov [Enforcement Proceedings:
Textbook for University Students]. Moscow: Iurait, 2021. 471 p. (In Russ.)
Galperin M.L. Translatsionalnoie ispolnitel’noe proizvodstvo: vzgliad v budushcheie
[Transnational Enforcement Proceedings: Looking into the Future]. Zakon – Law, 2012,
no. 5, pp. 140–146. (In Russ.)
Garnett R. Substance and Procedure in Private International Law. Oxford University
Press, 2012. 384 p.
Gessel-Kalinowska vel Kalisz B. The Legal, Real and Converged Interest in Declaratory
Relief. Wolters Kluwer, 2019. 368 p.
Getman-Pavlova I.V. Protsessual’nye kollizionnye normy v mezhdunadodnom chastnom
prave i mezhdunarodnom grazhdanskom protsesse [Procedural Conflict-of-Laws
Rules in Private International Law and International Civil Procedure]. Zhurnal rossiiskogo
prava – Russian Law Journal, 2018, no. 3, pp. 84–96. (In Russ.)
Getman-Pavlova I.V., Kasatkina A.S., Filatova M.A.; Getman-Pavlova I.V. (ed.).
Mezhdunarodnyi grazhdanskii protsess: uchebnik dlia bakalavriata i magistratury [International
Civil Procedure: Textbook for Bachelor and Master Students]. 2nd ed. Moscow:
Iurait, 2020. 341 p. (In Russ.)
Gongalo B.M. (ed.). Grazhdanskoe pravo: uchebnik: v 2 t. T. 1 [Civil Law: Textbook.
In 2 vols. Vol. 1]. 3rd ed. Moscow: Statut, 2018. 633 p. (In Russ.)
Grušić U. The European Private International Law of Employment. Cambridge University
Press, 2015. 382 p.
Gurvich M.A. Iavliaetsia li dokazyvanie v grazhdanskom protsesse iuridicheskoi
obiazannost’iu? [Is Submission of Proof in Civil Procedure a Legal Obligation?]. Sovetskaia
iustitsiia – Soviet Justice, 1975, no. 5, pp. 14–17. (In Russ.)
Huber U. Vozmeshchenie ubytkov vmesto predostavleniia [Payment of Damages
Instead of Specific Performance]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo prava – Civil Law Review,
2013, no. 5, pp. 247–283. (In Russ.)
Jackiewicz P. Evidence – The Parol Evidence Rule: Its Narrow Concept as a Substantive
Rule of Law. Notre Dame Law Review, 1955, vol. 30(4), pp. 653–661.
Karapetov A.G. (ed.). Dogovornoe i obiazatel’stvennoe pravo (general part): postateinyi
commentarii k stat’iam 307–453 Grazhdanskogo kodeksa Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Contract
Law and the Law of Obligations (General Part): Commentary to Articles 307–453 of
the Civil Code of the Russian Federation]. Moscow: M-Logos, 2017. 1120 p.(In Russ.)
Karapetov A.G. (ed.). Osnovnyye polozheniia grazhdanskogo prava: postateinyi kommentarii
k stat’iam 1–16.1 Grazhdanskogo kodeksa Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Fundamental
Provisions of Civil Law: Commentary to Articles 1–16.1 of the Civil Code of the Russian
Federation]. Moscow: M-Logos, 2020. 1469 p. (In Russ.)
Karapetov A.G., Fetisova E.M., Matvienko S.V., Safonova M.V. Obzor pravovykh
pozitsii Verkhovnogo Suda Rossiiskoi Federatsii po voprosam chastnogo prava za avgust
2017 g. [Digest of Case Law of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation for August
2017]. Vestnik ekonomicheskogo pravosudiia RF – Bulletin of Economic Justice of the Russian
Federation, 2017, no. 10, pp. 36–68. (In Russ.)
Khodykin R.M. Stat’ia 16 (p. 1) Grazhdanskogo kodeksa RF glazami angliiskogo suda:
po sledam dela “Berezovskii protiv Abramovicha” [Article 162(1) of the Civil Code of
the Russian Federation Through the Eyes of an English Court: In the Footsteps of Berezovsky
v. Abramovich]. Zakon – Law, 2014, no. 5, pp. 114–121. (In Russ.)
Kocourek A. Substance and Procedure. Fordham Law Review, 1941, vol. 10(2),
pp. 157–186.
Kroell S. Gap Filling and Contract Adaptation by Arbitral Tribunals. Heymann,
1998. 383 p.
Kroell S. The Burden of Proof for the Non-Conformity of Goods. Belgrade Law
Review, year LIX (2011), no. 3, pp. 162–180.
Kuitkowski D. The Law Applicable to Privilege Claims in International Arbitration.
Journal of International Arbitration, 2015, vol. 32(1), pp. 65–105.
Lebedev S.N., Kabatova E.V. (eds.). Mezhdunarodnoe chastnoe pravo: uchebnik: v 2 t.
T. 1 [Private International Law: Textbook. In 2 vols. Vol. 1]. Moscow: Statut, 2011. 400 p.
(In Russ.)
Lennard G.L. Specific Performance of Construction Contracts – Archaic Principles
Preclude Necessary Reform. Notre Dame Law Review, 1972, vol. 47(4), pp. 1025–1041.
Linne A. Burden of Proof Under Article 35 CISG. Pace International Law Review,
2008, vol. 20(1), pp. 31–44.
Malcai O., Levine-Schnur R. When Procedure Takes Priority: A Theoretical Evaluation
of the Contemporary Trends in Criminal Procedure and Evidence Law. Canadian
Journal of Law & Jurisprudence, 2017, vol. 30(1), pp. 187–213
Malcai O., Levine-Schnur R. Which Came First, the Procedure or the Substance?
Justificational Priority and the Substance-Procedure Distinction. Oxford Journal of Legal
Studies, 2014, vol. 34(1), pp. 1–19.
McClintock H.L. Distinguishing Substance and Procedure in the Conflict of Laws.
University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 1930, vol. 78(8), pp. 933–949.
McKendrick E., Maxwell I. Specific Performance in International Arbitration. Chinese
Journal of Comparative Law, 2013, vol. 1(2), pp. 195–220.
McMahon A.J. Differentiating between Internal and External Gaps in the U.N.
Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods: A Proposed Method for
Determining “Governed by” in the Context of Article 7(2). Columbia Journal of Transnational
Law, 2006, vol. 44(3), pp. 992–1031.
McParland M. The Rome I Regulation on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations.
Oxford University Press, 2015. 974 p.
Mourre A. Chapter 2: Judicial Penalties and Specific Performance in International
Arbitration. In Interest, Auxiliary and Alternative Remedies in International Arbitration.
International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), 2008, pp. 52–78.
Münchener Kommentar zur Zivilprozessordnung. 6. Aufl. C.H. Beck, 2020. 7800 p.
Munoz D. The Power of Arbitrators to Make Pro-Futuro Orders. In Schneider M.,
Knoll J. (eds.). Performance as a Remedy: Non-Monetary Relief in International Arbitration:
ASA Special Series No. 30. Juris Publishing, 2011, pp. 91–122.
Orlandi C. Burden of Proof, Standard of Proof, and Evidence Issues Under the CISG.
Journal of Law & Commerce, 2020, vol. 38(1), pp. 123–136.
Ostendorf P. The Exclusionary Rule of English Law and its Proper Characterisation
in the Conflict of Laws – Is It a Rule of Evidence or Contract Interpretation? Journal of
Private International Law, 2015, vol. 11(1), pp. 163–183.
Panagopoulos G. Substance and Procedure in Private International Law. Journal of
Private International Law, 2005, vol. 1(1), pp. 69–92.
Petsche M. Punitive Damages in International Commercial Arbitration: Much Ado
About Nothing? Arbitration International, 2013, vol. 29(1), pp. 89–104.
Pilkov K.N. Dokazatel’stva i dokazyvanie v mezhdunarodnom kommercheskom arbitrazhe
[Evidence and Proof in International Commercial Arbitration]. Kiev: Osvita
Ukrainy, 2016. 610 p. (In Russ.)
Pitel S. Enforcement of Foreign Non-Monetary Judgments in Canada (and Beyond).
Journal of Private International Law, 2007, vol. 3(2), pp. 241–260.
Plender R., Wilderspin M., The European Private International Law of Obligations.
3rd ed. Sweet & Maxwell, 2009. 1053 p.
Poudret J.F., Besson S. Comparative Law on International Arbitration. Sweet & Maxwell,
2007. 952 p.
Riabov A.A. Grazhdansko-pravoviie osnovy izmeneniia kvalifikatsii sdelok v nalogovom
prave [Civil Law Fundamentals of Changes in Legal Classification in Tax Law].
Tsivilist – Civil Law Scholar, 2012, no. 2, pp. 30–40. (In Russ.)
Sadikov O.N. (ed.). Grazhdanskoe pravo: uchebnik: v 2 t. T. 2 [Civil Law: Textbook.
In 2 vols. Vol. 2]. Moscow: Kontrakt; Infra-M, 2007. 608 p. (In Russ.)
Schneider M.E. Non-Monetary Relief in International Arbitration: Principles and
Arbitration Practice. In Schneider M., Knoll J. (eds.). Performance as a Remedy: Non-
Monetary Relief in International Arbitration: ASA Special Series No. 30. Juris Publishing,
2011, pp. 3–48.
Schumacher H. Specific Problems When Enforcing a Non-Monetary Award in Austria.
In Schneider M., Knoll J. (eds.). Performance as a Remedy: Non-Monetary Relief in International
Arbitration: ASA Special Series No. 30. Juris Publishing, 2011, pp. 347–354.
Schwenzer I., Schlechtriem P. Commentary on the UN Convention on the International
Sale of Goods (CISG). 4th ed. Oxford University Press, 2016. 1728 p.
Scorey D., Geddes R., Harris C. The Bermuda Form: Interpretation Dispute Resolution
of Excess Liability Insurance. 2nd ed. Oxford University Press, 2018. 592 p.
Sedova Zh.I., Zaitseva N.V. Printsip estoppel i otkaz ot prava v kommercheskom oborote
Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Estoppel and Waiver in the Commerce of the Russian Federation],
Moscow: Statut, 2014. 159 p. (In Russ.)
Shapp Ia.; Korolev S.V. (trans.). Sistema germanskogo grazhdanskogo prava: uchebnik
[System of German Civil Law: Textbook]. Moscow: Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniia,
2006. 357 p. (In Russ.)
Shvarts M.Z. Nekotorye razhmyshleniia nad institutom estoppel [Certain Thoughts
on the Estoppel Principle]. Arbitrazhnye spory – Commercial Disputes, 2016, no. 1,
pp. 95–99. (In Russ.)
Strelkova I.I. Model’ uproshchennogo sudebnogo razbiratel’stva v ramkakh ispolnitel’nogo
proizvodstva [The Model of Simplified Judicial Proceeding Within the Framework of
Enforcement Proceeding]. Ispolnitel’noe pravo – Law of Enforcement Proceedings, 2015,
no. 1, pp. 23–27. (In Russ.)
Tatarnikova K.P. Forma sdelok v grazhdanskom prave Rossii [Form of Legal Transactions
in Russian Civil Law]. Tomsk: Tomsk State University of Control Systems and
Radioelectronics Publishing House, 2012. 263 p. (In Russ.)
Tretiakov S.V. Pravo na chuzhoe povedenie i pravo na ego zashchitu [Claim-Rights
and Legal Remedies in the Continental Private Law Theory]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo
prava – Civil Law Review, 2019, no. 3, pp. 7–36. (In Russ.)
Virgo G., Worthington S. (eds.). Commercial Remedies: Resolving Controversies.
Cambridge University Press, 2017. 622 p.
Vogenauer S., Kleinheisterkamp J. (eds.). Commentary on the UNIDROIT Principles
of International Commercial Contracts (PICC). Oxford University Press, 2009. 1319 p.
Volodarskii D.B., Kashkarova I.N. Protsessual’nyi estoppel’ v sisteme obshchego prava
[Procedural Estoppel in the Common Law System]. Zakon – Law, 2020, no. 4, pp. 189–
204; no. 5, pp. 187–201. (In Russ.)
Waincymer J. Procedure and Evidence in International Arbitration. Kluwer Law
International, 2012. 1408 p.
Yahr M. Arbitration and Award: Specific Performance of a Building Contract Affirmed
by a Court of Equity. William & Mary Law Review, 1961, vol. 3(1), pp. 203–205.
Zhiltsov A.N. Primenimoe pravo v mezhdunarodnom kommercheskom arbitrazhe:
Imperativnye normy: dis. … kand. iurid. nauk [Governing law in international commercial
arbitration: peremptory rules: Thesis for a Candidate Degree in Law Sciences].
Moscow, 1998. (In Russ.)
Zykov R.O. Mezhdunarodnyi arbitrazh v Shvetsii: pravo i praktika [International
Arbitration in Sweden: Law and Practice]. Moscow: Statut, 2014. 285 p. (In Russ.)

Information about the author

V.N. Kostsov (Moscow, Russia) – Master of Private Law, PhD Candidate, School
of International Law, Faculty of Law, National Research University Higher School of
Economics (3 Bolshoi Trekhsviatitelskii Per., Moscow, 109028, Russia; vladimir.kostsov@
yandex.ru).

Recommended citation

Kostsov V.N. Pravovaia priroda sposobov pravovoi zashchity cherez prizmu mezhdunarodnogo
grazhdanskogo protsessa [Nature of Legal Relief Through the Lens of International
Civil Procedure]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa – Herald of Civil Procedure,
2021, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 179–228. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24031/2226-0781-2021-
11-4-179-228

 1a.jpg  баннер2.jpg  баннер3.jpg

Ключевые слова