Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 30 November 2012 № 29-П on the review of constitutionality of Section 5 of Article 244.6 and Section 2 of Article 333 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in connection with the complaints of A.G.Kruglov, A.V.Margin, V.A.Martynov and Yu.S.Shardyko

Legal issue: whether contested rules are constitutional, as long as they do enable a participant to court dispute to use his procedural rights, because they do not impose upon appellation court a duty to notify him about the place and time of considering his special appeal?

Ratio decidendi: having relied upon an extensive analysis of legislation, international law and its own previous holdings, the Court came to conclusion that contested provisions do conform to the Constitution, the principles of efficiency and judicial economy. The Court stated that the procedure for consideration of special appeals and submissions of a procurator, being a particular subsidiary mechanism and thus an exception to common procedures, is subject to higher requirements of procedural economy which call for an accelerated consideration of issues, not connected with the solution of the case on merits. However, an obligatory notification of the participants of the dispute is necessary, when an appellation court examines newly-presented evidence, and in any event all persons participating in the case must be notified about the fact of submission of special appeal and given an opportunity to comment on it in writing.

Dissenting opinion:
  • Such non-notification of participants of the dispute about time and place of court session within a procedure common for appellation proceedings, provided for by Chapter 10 of the Civil Procedure Code, shall improperly restrict their right to judicial protection in comparison with other participants, having the same procedural status.

Document (318.01 Kb)
Subject area:
Court Proceedings civil procedure