Koroied Serhii

Yearly journal of scientific articles Pravova derzhava
Volume 34 (2023), 421-430 p.

DOI: 10.33663/1563-3349-2023-34-421-430

Koroied Serhii. Procedural principles of the courts judgment in case of acceptance of the claim by the defendant

Introduction: The problem of the specifics of the adoption and content of the court judgment in a civil case in the case of acceptance of the claim by the defendant is considered. This problem is due to the lack of uniform approaches in the legal literature regarding the order of judgment adoption by the courts in the case of acceptance of the claim by the defendant. In particular, it is emphasized that the acceptance of the claim exempts the court from further investigation of the circumstances in the case, and the plaintiff from evidentiary work to substantiate the claim and is the basis for the court to satisfy the plaintiff s demands. The plenum of the Supreme  Court of Ukraine also clarified that the court in the motivational part of the judgment refers only to the recognition of the claim without clarifying and investigating other circumstances of the case. At the same time, procedural legislation establishes a uniform procedure for adopting court judgments and uniform requirements for their content.

The aim of the article: The purpose of the article is a scientific and practical analysis of the procedural principles of the adoption of a judgment by the court in acivil case in the case of acceptance of the claim by the defendant and establishment of the powers of the court in the field of evidence, the peculiarities of the adoption procedure and the content of such a court judgment.

Results: The results of the study are based on a systematic analysis of the provisions of the Civil Procedural Code of Ukraine, the theoretical foundations of the civil process and the judicial practice of the  Supreme Court. It was established that the acceptance of the claim by the defendant is the implementation of the dispositive principles of civil proceedings, which affects the progress of the civil case,as a result of which the further court proceedings (further clarification of the circumstances of the case and verification of them with evidence) must be stopped in order to resolve the issue of the courts judgment in connection with acceptance of the claim by the defendant. However, the right of the defendant to recognize the claim is not unconditional, since such administrative actions of the party must not contradict to the law and violate the rights, freedoms or interests of other persons; otherwise, the court issues a ruling on refusal to recognize the claim and continues the trial (in particular, for the purpose of attracting such interested persons to participate in the case or for the purpose of clarifying  circumstances relevant to the case orresearching  evidence). Attention is drawn to the fact that the existing civil-procedural regulation of the procedure for administering justice in civil cases does not provide for the differentiation of judicial procedures for the adoption of a judgment by the court (and the content of such a judgment) in the event if the defendant recognizes the claim. The content of the provisions of the procedural legislation does not allow us to talk about the existence of any separate procedure for the adoption of a summary judgment by the court on the satisfaction of the claim in connection with its acceptance by the defendant. It is substantiated that even when the defendant accepts the claim (which also includes his acceptance of the circumstances of the case set forth by the plaintiff in the statement of claim), the effect of the adversarial principle in the legal proceedings does not completely cease and does not release the court from fulfilling its duties in the field of proof. This is consistent with the position of the  Supreme Court that the courts are not entitled to base their judgment only on the fact that the defendant has acknowledged the claim, without investigating the circumstances of the case. That is, there must be not only recognition of the claim, but also legal grounds for satisfying the claim.

Conclusions: Thus, since the recognition of the claim by the defendant and the adoption in connection with this by the court of a judgment on the satisfaction of the claim is possible, if it does not contradict the law and does not violate the rights of other persons, therefore the court must indicate in the motivational part of its judgment as a legal basis the satisfaction of the claim recognized by the defendant, as well as established factual circumstances with reference to evidence. The adoption of a judgment by the court in connection with the recognition of the claim by the defendant does not presuppose reduction of the enshrined procedures of the claim proceedingsor the drafting by the court of an reduced text of the judgment.

Key words: civil proceedings, civil case, court, defendant, acceptance of the claim,satisfaction of the claim, circumstances of the case, court judgment, procedure for approving the judgment, content of the judgment.

References

1. Hurvych M. A. Reshenye sovetskoho suda v yskovom proyzvodstve. Moskva, 1955.S. 35; Kurs tsyvilnoho protsesu: pidruchnyk / V. V. Komarov, V. A. Bihun, V. V. Barankovata in.; za red. V. V. Komarova. Harkiv: Pravo, 2011. S. 625640 [ukr.]. 

2. Prokhorov P. A.Poriadok ukhvalennia sudovykh rishen u tsyvilnomu protsesi Ukrainy: dys. dokt. fi los. vhaluzi prava: 081. Odesa, 2021. 234 s. [ukr.]. 

3. Kuibida R., Syroid O. Posibnyk iznapysannia sudovykh rishen. Kyiv: Drim Art, 2013. 224 s. [ukr.]. 

4. Kurs tsyvilnoho protsesu: pidruchnyk / V. V. Komarov, V. A. Bihun, V. V. Barankova ta in.; za red.V. V. Komarova. Harkiv: Pravo, 2011. S. 649, 181186 [ukr.]. 

5. Shtefan M. Y. Tsyvilne protsesualne pravo Ukrainy: Akademichnyi kurs; Pidruch. dlia stud. yuryd. spets. vyshch.navch. zakl. Kyiv: Kontsern Vydavnychyi Dim In Yure, 2005. S. 229 [ukr.].

6. Shtefan M. Y. Tsyvilne protsesualne pravo Ukrainy: Akademichnyi kurs; Pidruch. dliastud. yuryd. spets. vyshch. navch. zakl. Kyiv: Kontsern Vydavnychyi Dim In Yure, 2005.S. 230 [ukr.]. 

7. Andronov I. V. Sudovi rishennia v tsyvilnomu protsesi Ukrainy: dys. dokt. yuryd. nauk: 12.00.03. Odesa, 2018. S. 193, 196 [ukr.]. 

8. Andronov I. V. Sudovirishennia v tsyvilnomu protsesi Ukrainy: dys. dokt. yuryd. nauk: 12.00.03. Odesa, 2018.S. 144, 100 [ukr.]. 

9. Fursa S. Ya., Shcherbak S. V., Yevtushenko O. I. Tsyvilnyi protses Ukrainy: Problemy i perspektyvy: Naukovo-praktychnyi posibnyk. Kyiv: Vydavets Fursa S. Ya.: KNT, 2006. S. 47 [ukr.]. 

10. Shtefan M. Y. Tsyvilne protsesualne pravo Ukrainy: Akademichnyi kurs; Pidruch. dlia stud. yuryd. spets. vyshch. navch. zakl. Kyiv:Kontsern Vydavnychyi Dim In Yure, 2005. S. 190, 229 [ukr.]. 

11. Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 02 zhovtnia 2018 roku u spravi 910/18036/17.
URL: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/77112562 (data zvernennia: 09.01.2023) [ukr.]. 

12. Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 15 chervnia 2020 roku u tsyvilnii spravi 588/1311/17, provadzhennia 61-39156sv18. URL: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/89824757 (data zvernennia:09.01.2023) [ukr]; postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 25 travnia 2022 roku u tsyvilnii spravi 675/2136/19, provadzhennia 61-2251sv22. URL: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/104539372 (data zvernennia: 09.01.2023) [ukr.].

<< Back