On June 14, the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation presented a draft resolution concerning cases of contesting decisions and actions of authorities. The document covers two types of litigation: under the Arbitration Procedure Code (Chapter 24) and under the Code of Administrative Procedure (Chapter 22).
In particular, the draft specifies exactly which acts, decisions and actions of bodies (persons) vested with public powers can be challenged in court. “This will greatly help both administrative plaintiffs and the courts, since often the appellate instance had to cancel the decisions of the court of first instance to refuse to accept or return an administrative claim,” says BGP Litigation adviser Ruslan Petruchak.
In general, the plenum tries to make the approach of the courts to the consideration of such disputes less formal. “The draft draws attention to the need to study the content of the contested act, and not just its name. Previously, the courts often refused to protect the violated right just because the document was named as an “act”,” explains Stanislav Matyushov, senior lawyer at Vegas Lex law firm.
The document emphasizes the active role of the court in considering this category of disputes and cites circumstances that are subject to verification by the court, regardless of the arguments of the administrative claim. Thus, the draft allows for the restoration of a time limit missed for challenging without a petition from the applicant, requiring the courts to assess the good faith of such a pass.
In addition, the draft states that the decisions of the authorities, issued by way of an internal appeal, are subject to a separate challenge if they change the rights of the parties to the dispute regarding the original decision. For example, if they contain new conclusions about the presence of additional elements of the violation or change the qualification of the violation, the partner of Kulik & Partners Law clarifies. Economics Anna Bolshakova. The Supreme Court also draws attention to the fact that even an improvement in the position of the applicant by an intradepartmental appeal must be motivated and justified and must not be carried out arbitrarily, otherwise such a decision may be canceled by the court.
More news in Telegram channel “Kommersant”.