Yearly journal of scientific articles “Pravova derzhava” Volume 33 (2022), 409-420 p.
DOI: 10.33663/1563-3349-2022-33-409-420
Koroed Serhii. Inadequate subject composition of the parties in a civil case as a new ground for restricting judicial jurisdiction: the problem of the offi cial – defendant in civil proceedings (on example of a labor dispute)
Introduction: Recent case law of the new Supreme Court has pointed to the possibility of limiting the jurisdiction of courts in civil cases due to incorrect identifi cation of the defendant. Thus, in a labor dispute over the plaintiff ’s reinstatement as a schoolteacher, the Supreme Court closed the case because the lawsuit was fi led not against the school but directly against the school’s principal, whose actions the plaintiff challenged. This approach of the Supreme Court to civil jurisdiction is new and has not been the subject of scholarly research, in particular in terms of the legal impossibility of civil proceedings, which courts cannot consider at all, in particular due to inadequate subjective composition of the parties, if the defendant specifi ed an offi cial.
The aim of the article: The aim of the article is to scientifi cally and practically analyze the issue of improper subject composition of the parties in a civil case as a new basis for limiting judicial jurisdiction through the prism of the problem of an offi cial as an improper defendant in civil proceedings, and formulate conclusions on legal possibility (impossibility) of consideration of claims fi led against an offi cial.
Results: Based on the analysis of the theoretical foundations of civil procedure and judicial practice, the status of the improper defendant and the procedural consequences of fi ling a lawsuit against him are revealed. The issue of participation in the civil case of «offi cials – defendants» as participants in civil procedural relations and the procedural consequences of such participation are reviewed. It is established that exactly in a lawsuit it is embodied the substantive legal claim of the plaintiff , the elements of which are the subject, grounds and parties. In view of this, the existence of civil litigation can be denied only if the parties (plaintiff and defendant) do not have civil procedural capacity (excluding the ability to have civil procedural rights and obligations of the party), which excludes the existence of the party as participant in the case. Since all natural and legal persons have civil procedural legal capacity, the indication in the lawsuit as a defendant of any natural or legal person and provided it was determined the subject of the claim civil relations, and the basis – the existence of a legal dispute (regardless of legality or proof determination of the defendant), this legally causes a violation of civil procedure with the possibility of further replacement of the improper defendant. In addition, since both the plaintiff and the defendant are parties to a civil case only as a natural person or legal entity, even if the defendant stated in the statement of claim an offi cial, such an offi cial is a party to civil proceedings as a natural person. Consequently, the offi cial – defendant acts as a participant in a civil case as a natural person, regardless of position or place of work, because another status natural person – the defendant in accordance with the provisions of procedural law in civil proceedings can not have.
Conclusions: It is proven an incorrect approach, which denies the legal possibility of considering claims against the defendant – offi cial, because such a defendant (individual in the status of offi cial) is a party to a civil case on the basis of his civil procedural capacity as an individual. It is concluded that for civil proceedings the presence of a status of offi cial may not be relevant to determine the possibility or impossibility of consideration by the court of a claim against such an offi cial, even if he is an improper defendant, if the relevant legal dispute falls within the jurisdiction of the court and the plaintiff has the right to go to court with such a claim.
Key words: civil proceedings, civil case, parties, improper defendant, offi cial, judicial jurisdiction, restrictions, claim.
References
1. Koroied S.O. Problema nenalezhnoho vidpovidacha u tsyvilnomu sudochynstvi yak pereshkoda efektyvnomu sudovomu zakhystu prav pozyvacha. Sudova apeliatsiia. 2018. ¹ 2 (51). S. 91–100 [ukr]; Koroied Serhii. Procedural eff ects of fi ling a lawsuit against an affi liate of a legal entity in civil proceedings. Entrepreneurship, Economy and Law. 2021. ¹ 9. P. 18–22. 2. Kurs tsyvilnoho protsesu: pidruchnyk / V. V. Komarov, V. A. Bihun, V. V. Barankova ta in.; za red. V. V. Komarova. Kharkiv: Pravo, 2011. S. 303; Tsyvilnyi protses Ukrainy: akademichnyi kurs: [pidruchnyk dlia stud. yuryd. spets. vyshch. navch. zakl.]; [za red. S.Ia. Fursy]. Kyiv: Vydavets Fursa S.Ia.: KNT, 2009. S. 377 [ukr]. 3. Postanova Velykoi Palaty Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 01 kvitnia 2020 roku u spravi ¹ 520/13067/17. Yedynyi derzhavnyi reiestr sudovykh rishen. URL: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/89251545 (data zvernennia: 11.02.2022) [ukr]. 4. Koroied S. O., Prut Yu. A. Obmezhenist predmetnoi yurysdyktsii administratyvnykh sudiv oznakamy publichnopravovoho sporu yak pereshkoda realizatsii konstytutsiinoho prava na oskarzhennia v sudi vsikh rishen, dii chy bezdiialnosti subiektiv vladnykh povnovazhen. Derzhava i pravo: Zbirnyk naukovykh prats. Seriia Yurydychni nauky. Vypusk 81 / In-t derzhavy i prava im. V.M. Koretskoho NAN Ukrainy. Kyiv: Vyd-vo «Iurydychna dumka», 2018. S.105–116 [ukr]. 5. Bernaziuk Ya. Pro pozovy, yaki ne pidliahaiut sudovomu rozghliadu. Sudebnoyurydycheskaia hazeta. 2019. 9 travnia. URL: https://sud.ua/ru/news/blog/140426-propozovi-yaki-ne-pidlyagayut-sudovomu-rozglyadu (data zvernennia: 11.02.2022) [ukr]. 6. Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu u skladi kolehii suddiv Druhoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu vid 12 sichnia 2022 roku u spravi ¹ 592/6904/21. Yedynyi derzhavnyi reiestr sudovykh rishen. URL: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/102562471 (data zvernennia: 11.02.2022) [ukr]. 7. Bychkova S. S. Vyznachennia nenalezhnoi storony u tsyvilnomu protsesi Ukrainy. Forum prava. 2010. ¹ 4. S. 77. URL: http://www.nbuv.gov.ua/e-journals/FP/2010-4/10bcccpu.pdf (data zvernennia: 11.02.2022) [ukr]. 8. Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu u skladi kolehii suddiv Tretoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu vid 7 zhovtnia 2020 roku u spravi ¹ 705/3876/18. Yedynyi derzhavnyi reiestr sudovykh rishen. URL: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/92120313 (data zvernennia: 11.02.2022) [ukr]. 9. Koroied S. O. Problema nenalezhnoho vidpovidacha u tsyvilnomu sudochynstvi yak pereshkoda efektyvnomu sudovomu zakhystu prav pozyvacha. Sudova apeliatsiia. 2018. ¹ 2 (51). S. 93 [ukr]. 10. Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu u skladi kolehii suddiv Tretoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu vid 12 kvitnia 2021 roku u spravi ¹ 557/94/19. URL: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/96179645 (data zvernennia: 11.02.2022) [ukr]. 11. Postanova Velykoi Palaty Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 17 kvitnia 2018 roku u spravi ¹ 523/9076/16-ts. URL: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/73469613 (data zvernennia: 11.02.2022) [ukr]. 12. Koroied S. O. Novyi pohliad na teoriiu pozovu v tsyvilnomu protsesi. Sudova apeliatsiia. 2014. ¹ 4 (37). S. 65–69[ukr]. 13. Ukhvala sudovoi kolehii v tsyvilnykh spravakh Verkhovnoho Sudu Ukrainy vid 29 lystopada 2000 roku. Rishennia Verkhovnoho Sudu Ukrainy. Shchorichnyk. 2001. URL: https://www.viaduk.net/clients/vs.nsf/0/F631CFC 15396726CC2256C5600408D8D?OpenDocument (data zvernennia: 11.02.2022) [ukr]. 14. Hrushytskyi A. Khto mozhe buty storonoiu sudovoho protsesu: postanovka problemy. Sudebno-yurydycheskaia hazeta. 2020. 28 liutoho. URL: https://sud.ua/ru/news/blog/162177-khto-mozhe-buti-storonoyu-sudovogo-protsesu-postanovka-problemi (data zvernennia: 11.02.2022) [ukr]. 15. Ohliad praktyky Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu u skladi Verkhovnoho Sudu u spravakh pro zakhyst hidnosti, chesti ta dilovoi reputatsii (vid 02.09.2019) / Uporiad.: kand. yuryd. nauk, dotsent D. D. Luspenyk. Kyiv, 2019. S. 8, 14, 15. URL: https://supreme.court.gov.ua/userfi les/media/Ogljad_KCS.pdf (data zvernennia: 11.02.2022) [ukr]. 16. Postanova Velykoi Palaty Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 1 kvitnia 2020 roku u spravi ¹ 520/13067/17. Yedynyi derzhavnyi reiestr sudovykh rishen. URL: https://reyestr. court.gov.ua/Review/89251545 (data zvernennia: 11.02.2022) [ukr]. 17. Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu u skladi kolehii suddiv Kasatsiinoho hospodarskoho sudu vid 22 zhovtnia 2020 roku u spravi ¹ 910/4286/20. Yedynyi derzhavnyi reiestr sudovykh rishen. URL: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/92384861 (data zvernennia: 11.02.2022) [ukr]. 18. Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu u skladi kolehii suddiv Pershoi sudovoi palaty Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu vid 02 hrudnia 2020 roku u spravi ¹ 490/3876/19. Yedynyi derzhavnyi reiestr sudovykh rishen. URL: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/93708806 (data zvernennia: 11.02.2022) [ukr].
<< Back
