Meniuk Daryna

Yearly journal of scientific articles Pravova derzhava Volume 33 (2022), 466-475 p.

DOI: 10.33663/1563-3349-2022-33-466-475

Meniuk Daryna. Newly discovered circumstances as a basis for review of a court decision in the civil process of Ukraine

It is noted that the newly discovered circumstances are perceived mostly as legal facts that existed at the time of the trial and were essential for its proper resolution, but were not and could not be known to the court or interested parties, violated the rights and legitimate interests of individuals or legal entities, and being identifi ed after the entry into force of a court decision, and are grounds for their review in criminal, civil and commercial cases.

However, in contrast to the newly discovered circumstances, which arose or changed only after the court decision and are not related to the claim in this case, and therefore could not be taken into account by the court in the decision, are new circumstances and may be grounds for making a new claim.

It was also noted that the newly discovered circumstances provided for in paragraph 1 of Part 2 of Art. 423 of the Code of civil procedure of Ukraine, as legal facts, should be distinguished from the circumstances that have already been the subject of evidence in the case. At the same time, as these are circumstances that may infl uence a court decision, they must also be proved by a person who refers to such circumstances as a basis for reviewing a court decision that has entered into force. In contrast to this circumstance, the newly discovered circumstances specifi ed in paragraph 2; 3 Part 2 Art. 423 of the Code of civil procedure of Ukraine, are established by a court decision, i.e. are those that do not require proof.

The legislator has determined the following conditions under which the court decision may be reviewed in accordance with paragraph 2 of Part 2 of Art. 423 of the Code of civil procedure of Ukraine: 1) the fact of providing knowingly incorrect expert opinion, knowingly false testimony of a witness, knowingly incorrect translation, falsity of written, material or electronic evidence; 2) the specifi ed facts are established by the sentence or the decision on closing of criminal proceedings and release of the person from criminal liability which, in turn, came into legal force; 3) these facts led to the adoption of an illegal decision in the case under review.

Paragraph 3 Part 2 of Art. 423 of the Code of civil procedure of Ukraine, the newly discovered circumstances include the revocation of a court decision, which became the basis for a court decision to be reviewed. The conditions necessary for the review of a court decision on this ground are: 1) the direct impact of the court decision on another case on the court decision to be reviewed; 2) revocation of such a court decision. It is important in this newly discovered circumstance that there must be a certain material and legal connection between court decisions, so the facts established in one case must be essential for another.

Thus, the newly discovered circumstances were considered as a category of civil procedural law. The newly discovered circumstances, in the current version of the Code of civil procedure of Ukraine, can be defi ned as essential grounds for the case to review the court decision, which the party became aware of after the court decision came into force. At the same time, materiality, as a sign of newly discovered circumstances, should be perceived as their ability to signifi cantly infl uence the motivational and / or operative part of the court decision. Uncertainty at the time of the case, as a sign of newly discovered circumstances, should be defi ned as establishing the objective impossibility of taking such circumstances into account when making a court decision, which, in turn, indicates the diff erence between new evidence and newly discovered circumstances. In addition to the general features, a set of conditions for each of the newly discovered circumstances, identifi ed by the legislator as grounds for reviewing a court decision that has entered into force, was also considered. 

Key words: newly discovered circumstances, review of court decisions, civil process.

References

1. Rezunenko, A. N. Peresmotr sudebnikh aktov, vstupyvshykh v zakonnuiu sylu, po vnov otkrivshymsia obstoiatelstvam kak stadyia hrazhdanskoho protsessa: dys. kand. yuryd. nauk: 12.00.1. Volhohrad, 2001. S. 2627. (rus); Treushnykov, M. K. Hrazhdanskyi protsess: uchebnyk. Moskva: Yzdatelstvo Statut, 2014. S. 366. (rus); Borodin, M. V. Perehliad rishen, shcho nabraly zakonnoi syly, u zviazku z novovyiavlenymy obstavynamy za novym TsPK Ukrainy. Pravo Ukrainy. 2004. 11. S. 42. (ukr). 2. Novovyiavleni obstavyny. Yurydychna entsyklopediia: u 6 t. T. 4 / redkol.: Yu. S. Shemshuchenko (holova redkol.), M. P. Ziabliuk, V. Ya. Tatsii ta in.; NAN Ukrainy, In-t derzhavy i prava im. Koretskoho. Kyiv: Ukr. entsykl., 2003. S. 179. (ukr). 3. Morozova, L. S. Peresmotr reshenyi po vnov otkrivshymsia obstoiatelstvam. Moskva, 1959. S. 41. (rus). 4. Alyev, T. T., Afanasev, S. F. K voprosu ob osnovanyiakh dlia peresmotra po vnov otkrivshymsia obstoiatelstvam reshenyi, opredelenyi suda, vstupyvshykh v zakonnuiu sylu, predusmotrennikh HPK RF. Arbytrazhnii y hrazhdanskyi protsess. 2004. 5. S. 30. (rus) 5. Petruchak, R. K. Proyzvodstvo po peresmotru vstupyvshykh v zakonnuiu sylu sudebnikh aktov po vnov otkrivshymsia yly novim obstoiatelstvam v hrazhdanskom sudoproyzvodstve:monohrafyia. Moskva: Prospekt, 2016. S. 54. (rus). 6. Shtefan, M. Y. Tsyvilnyi protses:Pidruchnyk dlia stud. Yuryd. spetsialnostei vyshchykh zakladiv osvity. Vyd. 2-he, pererob. ta dop. Kyiv: Vydavnychyi Dim In Yure, 2001. S. 612613. (ukr). Kurs hrazhdanskoho sudoproyzvodstva. T. 1. 2-e yzd., yspr. y dop. S.-Pb.: Typ. M. M. Stasiulevycha, 1876. S. 269. (rus). 7. Kolesnyk, R. Istotni dlia spravy obstavyny yak pidstava dlia perehliadu rishennia hospodarskoho sudu za novovyiavlenymy obstavynamy. Pidpryiemnytstvo, hospodarstvo i pravo. 2017. 3. S. 77. (ukr). 8. Pro praktyku perehliadu sudamy u zviazku z novovyiavlenymy obstavynamy rishen, ukhval i postanov u tsyvilnykh spravakh, shcho nabraly zakonnoi syly: Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu Ukrainy vid 27.02.1981 r. 1. Postanovy Plenumu Verkhovnoho Sudu Ukrainy ta vyshchykh spetsializovanykh sudiv Ukrainy: tsyvilni, hospodarski spravy, trudovi spory / Uporiad. Kuzmin S. A., M. S. Kucherenko. Kyiv: PALYVODA A. V., 2013. S. 579580. (ukr). 9. Pro zastosuvannia tsyvilnoho protsesualnoho zakonodavstva pry perehliadi sudovykh rishen u zviazku z novovyiavlenymy obstavynamy: Postanova Vyshchoho spetsializovanoho sudu z rozghliadu tsyvilnykh i kryminalnykh sprav vid 30.03.2012 r. 4. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/v0004740-12#Text (ukr). 10. Mudretska, H. V. Aktualni pytannia perehliadu sudovykh rishen u zviazku z novovyiavlenymy obstavynamy u tsyvilnomu protsesi. Tsyvilne pravo i tsyvilnyi protses; simeine pravo; hospodarske pravo. Naukovyi visnyk publichnoho ta pryvatnoho prava. Dnipropetrovsk, 2015. 2. S. 45. (ukr). 11. Senyk, S. Problemy teorii ta praktyky perehliadu sudovykh rishen u zviazku z novovyiavlenymy obstavynamy v tsyvilnomu sudochynstvi. S. Senyk, M. Oprysko. Pidpryiemnytstvo, hospodarstvo i pravo. 2015. 9. S.24. (ukr). 12. Petruchak, R. K. Vkaz. pratsia. S. 6667. (rus). 13. Kryminalnyi kodeks Ukrainy: Zakon Ukrainy vid 5.04.2001 r. 2341-III. Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy. 2001. 2526. st. 131. (ukr). 14. Didyk, S.Ie. Rodovyi obiekt zlochyniv proty pravosuddia (problemy vyznachennia). Chasopys Kyivskoho universytetu prava. Kryminalne pravo ta kryminolohiia. 2011/4. S. 320. (ukr). 15. Honhalo, R. F. Pidstavy perehliadu sudovykh rishen za novovyiavlenymy obstavynamy. Chasopys tsyvilistyky. Vypusk 34, spetsvypusk Tsyvilnyi protses. S. 43. (ukr).

<< Back