UDC 347.91

S. V. Shcherbak,

DOI 10.37749/2308-9636-2023-7(247)- 5

Candidate of Law,

Associate Professor of the Department of Administrative and Information Law

Sumy National Agrarian University

 

 

PREJUDICE OF JUDICIAL ACTS ADOPTED IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AND IN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFENCE CASES AS A GROUND FOR EXEMPT FROM EVIDENCE  IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS

The article is devoted to the study of the prejudice of judicial acts adopted in criminal proceedings and in cases of administrative offenses. It is determined that thanks to the institution of prejudice, the injured person, whose rights were violated by a criminal offense, has the right, after the verdict enters into legal force, to apply to the court with a claim under the rules of civil procedure and within the framework of another process to recover compensation for the damage caused by the criminal offense in his favor. The definition of the limits of the action of prejudice by the range of prejudicial circumstances and the range of persons to whom these circumstances apply is substantiated. The manifestation of prejudice by object should be understood as the range of circumstances that are given a prejudicial character. The manifestation of prejudice by subject makes it possible to find out in relation to whom certain facts of a preliminary nature were established by the court, as well as to establish the persons to whom the preliminary court decision applies. A conclusion was made about the inter-branch nature of the prejudice of judicial acts adopted in criminal proceedings and in proceedings on an administrative offense (a court verdict in criminal proceedings, a resolution on the closure of criminal proceedings and the release of a person from criminal liability, and a court resolution in a case on an administrative offense that have entered into legal force), the effect of which extends to several branches of law. It is substantiated that in the context of the theory of evidentiary law for civil proceedings, criminal prejudice or prejudice in an administrative offense means the release of the plaintiff from proving facts already established by a court verdict or decision (on the closure of criminal proceedings and the release of a person from criminal liability) in criminal proceedings or a resolution in a case of an administrative offense, but not in full, but only within the limits outlined by law. An analysis of the genesis of the prejudice of judicial acts adopted in criminal proceedings and in a case of an administrative offense, starting from the Code of Civil Procedure of the Ukrainian SSR of 1963 to the present, was carried out and a conclusion was drawn that there has been an evolution of prejudice in civil proceedings and a significant expansion of its boundaries by determining, in addition to the court verdict, other judicial acts: court resolutions in a case of an administrative offense and resolutions on the closure of criminal proceedings and the release of a person from criminal liability. The essential features of the preliminary connection between a previous verdict, ruling or decision of the court and the civil case under consideration, and its limits depending on the type of jurisdiction, are disclosed. The objective and subjective limits of the preliminary judgment of judicial acts adopted in criminal proceedings and in proceedings on an administrative offense, established by procedural legislation, are disclosed. The objective limits of the preliminary judgment of judicial acts adopted in criminal proceedings and in proceedings on an administrative offense, determined by the obligation for the court considering a civil case on the legal consequences of the actions or inaction of a person,in respect of which these judicial acts were adopted, only in the question of whether these actions (inaction) took place and whether they were committed by this person. The subjective limits of the prejudice of judicial acts adopted in criminal proceedings and in proceedings on an administrative offense are clearly defined by procedural law, in particular, the prejudice of judicial acts operates regardless of whether the participants in criminal proceedings coincide with the participants in a civil case (unlike the prejudice of judicial decisions in civil cases, where these must be the same persons or at least one of them). The concept of the prejudice of judicial acts adopted in criminal proceedings and in a case on an administrative offense is defined, which means the impossibility of refuting the circumstances established by such judicial decisions when considering another civil case on the consequences of their actions or inaction in the question of whether these actions (inaction) took place and whether they were committed by this person. The problematic aspects that arise in judicial practice when deciding by courts on the admissibility of prejudice of judicial acts adopted in criminal proceedings and in cases of administrative offenses are revealed. It is proposed, taking into account the broader meaning of the interpretation of the term proof, which includes proof, to use in the theory of evidentiary law when studying prejudices the phrase not exemption from proof, but exemption from proof.

Keywords: prejudice, inter-branch prejudice, court verdict, civil proceedings, exemption from proof, exemption from proof, grounds for exemption from proof, facts that are not subject to proof.

 

List of used literature

  1. Masyuk V. V. Presumptions and Prejudices in Civil Procedure. Monograph. Kharkiv: Pravo, 2011. 208 p.
  2. Pavlova M. Classification of types of prejudice as a tool for determining its essence. Entrepreneurship, Economy and Law. 2016. No. 7. P. 133—
  3. Civil Procedure Code of the Ukrainian SSR of July 16, 1963. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1501-06#Text .
  4. Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine dated March 18, 2004. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1618-15#Text.
  5. Masyuk V. V. Presumptions and prejudices in civil proceedings: author’s abstract of the dissertation … candidate of legal sciences: 12.00.03. Yaroslav the Wise National Academy of Law of Ukraine. Kharkiv, 2010. 20 p.
  6. On Amendments to the Commercial Procedural Code of Ukraine, the Civil Procedural Code of Ukraine, the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine and Other Legislative Acts. Law of Ukraine dated 10.2017 No. 2147-VIII, URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2147-19/ed20171003#Text .
  7. Fennych V. M. Judicial Prejudices, Commonly Known and Recognized Facts. Theory of Evidential Law: Scientific and Practical Handbook (Monograph), ed. by M. M. Yasynka. Kyiv: Alerta, 2021. 426 p.
  8. Kucher T. M. Theory of proof in civil proceedings. author’s abstract. dissertation. … doctor of law: 12.00.03. Kyiv National Taras Shevchenko University. Kyiv, 2017. 42 p.
  9. Civil Process of Ukraine. Academic Course. Textbook / edited by S. Ya. Fursa. Kyiv: Publisher Fursa S. Ya., 2009. 848 p.
  10. Resolution of the Supreme Court of March 26, 2020 in case No. 730/67/16-k, proceedings No. 51-6463km19. URL: https://zakononline.com.ua/court-decisions/show/88495210 .