Menu: Home :: go to Journal :: switch to Russian :: switch to English
You are here: all Journals and Issues→ Journal→ Issue→ Article

Multivariant legal status of a citizen and its role in defining the competence of arbitration courts

Annotation

This study is devoted to the question of qualification of the legal status of a citizen in a dispute arising in the field of economic activity, and its impact on the determination of the jurisdiction of the arbitration court. On the example of cases on debt collection from the guarantor-citizen it is noted that the latter can participate in the disputed legal relations as an natural person, as an self-employed entrepreneur or as the founder of a legal body. It is the legal status of a person, as established judicial practice shows, that is the key argument in determining the legal within jurisdiction of the case. It seems that this circumstance in itself cannot determine the nature of the dispute, which previously drew the attention of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation It is important to take into account the specific legal nature of material legal relations, as well as the nature of the interest of its participants. It is concluded that it is necessary to take into account the abovementioned aspects in the aggregate when determining the jurisdiction of arbitration courts of the cases of the analyzed category. In order to ensure the legal certainty and effectiveness of the protection of the rights of persons in the field of business and economic activity, proposed a technical and legal solution to this problem.

Keywords

arbitration process; legal within jurisdiction; economic disputes; citizens as participants of arbitration process

Full-text in one file

Download

DOI

10.20310/2587-9340-2018-2-8-48-60

UDC

347.986

Pages

48-60

References

1. Afanasyev S.F., Zakharyashcheva I.Y. (eds.). Arbitrazhnoye protsessual’noye pravo: v 2 chastyakh [Arbitration Adjective Law: in 2 parts]. Moscow, “Yurayt” Publ., 2018, part 1, 399 p. (In Russian). 2. Andreyeva T.K. Reforma sudoustroystva i perspektivy razvitiya arbitrazhnogo protsessual’nogo zakonodatel’stva [Actual problems of application of the rules of court jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction of civil court: analysis of judicial practice]. Trudy Instituta gosudarstva i prava Rossiyskoy akademii nauk – Proceedings of the Institute of State and Law of the RAS, 2017, vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 145-161. (In Russian). 3. Pimenova E.N. Modernizatsiya grazhdanskogo zakonodatel’stva i problemy kompetentsii arbitrazhnogo suda [The question of influence of norms of the modernized civil law to the institution of competence of arbitration court]. Vestnik Rossiyskogo universiteta kooperatsii – Vestnik of the Russian University of Cooperation, 2016, no. 4 (26), pp. 132-135. (In Russian). 4. Savelyeva T.A. Aktual’nyye problemy primeneniya norm o podvedomstvennosti i podsudnosti sudami grazhdanskoy yurisdiktsii: analiz sudebnoy praktiki [Actual problems of application of the rules of court jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction of civil court: analysis of judicial practice]. Nauchnyy al’manakh – Science Almanac, 2015, no. 11 (4)-13, pp. 491-494. DOI 10.17117/na.2015.11.04.491. (In Russian). 5. Zankovskiy S.S. Problemy pravovogo regulirovaniya i sudebnogo tolkovaniya poruchitel’stva [Problems of legal regulation and judicial interpretation of the guarantee]. Trudy Instituta gosudarstva i prava Rossiyskoy akademii nauk – Proceedings of the Institute of State and Law of the RAS, 2017, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 112-126. (In Russian). 6. Trezubov E.S. O fidutsiarnosti otnosheniy pokrytiya v poruchitel’stve, ili o vliyanii peremeny lits na storone dolzhnika na sud’bu poruchitel’stva [Fiduciary of the coverage relationship in surety, or the substitution of parties on the debtor's side and its influence on the surety procedure]. Vestnik Kemerovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Gumanitarnyye i obshchestvennyye nauki – Bulletin of Kemerovo State University. Series: Humanities and Social Sciences, 2018, no. 1, pp. 74-81. DOI 10.21603/2542-1840-2018-1-74-81. (In Russian). 7. Lamova M.V. Poruchitel’, trebuyushchiy zashchity kak potrebitel’: evropeyskiy vzglyad na problemu [Guarantor requiring protection as a consumer: european view on the problem]. Vestnik Vysshego Arbitrazhnogo suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Bulletin of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation], 2014, no. 7, pp. 20-46. (In Russian). 8. Grigoryeva T.A. Evolyutsiya institutov sudebnoy zashchity v tsivilisticheskom protsesse [Judicial protection institutions evolution in the civil process]. Vlast’ zakona – The Reign of Law, 2012, no. 4 (12), pp. 32-42. (In Russian). 9. Bevzenko R.S. Novelly sudebnoy praktiki v sfere poruchitel’stva. Kommentariy k Postanovleniyu Plenuma Vysshego Arbitrazhnogo suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii ot 12 iyulya 2012 g. № 42 «O nekotorykh voprosakh razresheniya sporov, svyazannykh s poruchitel’stvom» [Novelties of judicial practice in the field of surety. Comment to the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation of July 12, 2012 no. 42 “On some issues of resolution of disputes related to the surety”]. Vestnik Vysshego Arbitrazhnogo suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Bulletin of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation], 2013, no. 1, pp. 74-85. (In Russian). 10. Yudin A.V. Interpretatsiya kriteriya sub”yektnogo sostava grazhdansko-pravovogo spora dlya tseley opredeleniya podvedomstvennosti dela sudu obshchey yurisdiktsii (po materialam praktiki VS RF) [Interpretation of criteria of subject structure of civil-law dispute for determination of jurisdiction of the courts of general jurisdiction (on materials of practice of the Supreme Court of Russian Federation)]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa – Herald of the Civil Process, 2012, no. 4, pp. 269-287. (In Russian).

Received

2018-07-26

Section of issue

Procedural law

Для корректной работы сайта используйте один из современных браузеров. Например, Firefox 55, Chrome 60 или более новые.