The difference between newly discovered and new circumstances in the judicial review process

Svitlana Bychkova; Tetiana Fedosieieva; Bohdan Kyrdan; Anton Chubenko; Serhii Sabluk

doi:10.34069/AI/2022.51.03.22

Svitlana Bychkova Doctor of Law, Professor. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8227-2127
Tetiana Fedosieieva National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1521-2922
Bohdan Kyrdan National Academy of Internal Affairs, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9284-9930
Anton Chubenko Legal Support Office for Central Administration of the Asset Recovery and Management Agency, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0887-5667
Serhii Sabluk Scientific Institute of Public Law, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5055-9169

DOI: https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2022.51.03.22

Keywords: civil proceedings, judicial decision, new circumstances, newly discovered circumstances.

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to compare new and newly discovered circumstances, which are taken into account by the court when reviewing judicial decisions. The subject of the study is newly discovered circumstances and new circumstances. Research methodology. The following methods are used in the course of the research: normative and dogmatic method, historical method, the method of analyses, logical method, legal and comparative method, method of summarization. Research results. The process of the establishment of the institution of review of court decisions is revealed. The concept of newly discovered circumstances and their place in the system of civil proceedings are considered. The view of the Supreme Court on the interpretation of newly discovered and new circumstances is analyzed. Comparative description of new and newly discovered circumstances is provided. Practical meaning. The differences between new and newly discovered circumstances in the process of reviewing court decisions are identified. Value / originality. The concept of new circumstances in civil proceedings is provided. It is stressed on the necessity for further study of new circumstances and the incorporation of such a list in existing legislation.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Svitlana Bychkova, Doctor of Law, Professor.

Doctor of Law, Professor.

Tetiana Fedosieieva, National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, Ukraine.

PhD in Law, Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Department of Private Law of National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, Ukraine.

Bohdan Kyrdan, National Academy of Internal Affairs, Ukraine.

PhD in Law, Associate Professor of the Department of Civil Law Disciplines of the National Academy of Internal Affairs, Ukraine.

Anton Chubenko, Legal Support Office for Central Administration of the Asset Recovery and Management Agency, Ukraine.

Doctor of Law, Professor, Head of Legal Support Office for Central Administration of the Asset Recovery and Management Agency, Ukraine.

Serhii Sabluk, Scientific Institute of Public Law, Ukraine.

PhD in Law, Chief Scientific Officer of the Scientific Institute of Public Law, Ukraine.

References

Brennan, M. E. (2008). Interpreting the Phrase "Newly Discovered Evidence": May Previously Unavailable Exculpatory Testimony Serve as the Basis for a Motion for a New Trial Under Rule 33? Fordham Law Review, 77(3), pp. 1095-1145. https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4404&context=flr

Case No. 552/137/15-ts (2018). Resolution of the Supreme Court of Ukraine, Unified state register of court decisions. Kyiv, Ukraine, 29 August 2018. Retrieved from https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/76502908

Case No. 477/1012/14-a (2018). Resolution of the Supreme Court of Ukraine, Unified state register of court decisions. Kyiv, Ukraine, 03 April 2018. Retrieved from https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/73195172

Case No. 816/4947/14 (2018). Resolution of the Supreme Court of Ukraine, Unified state register of court decisions. Kyiv, Ukraine, 06 February 2018. Retrieved from https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/72088974

Case No. 815/756/14 (2018). Resolution of the Supreme Court of Ukraine, Unified state register of court decisions. Kyiv, Ukraine, 13 February 2018. Retrieved from. https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/72290140

Case No. 2a-23903/09/1270 (2018e). Resolution of the Supreme Court of Ukraine, Unified state register of court decisions. Kyiv, Ukraine, 06 March 2018. Retrieved from. https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/72604968

Civil Procedure Code of the USSR (1923). The Assembly of Legacies and Orders of the Workers and Peasants Government, 1(46–47), pp. 478. https://vcpi.nlb.by/static/pdf/kodexy-BSSR/3ok2193_1923_n_46-47.pdf

Garland, D. S. (2015). New Trial / Newly Discovered Evidence. Favorable and Noteworthy Decisions in the Supreme Court and Federal Appellate Courts. Casetext Inc. https://casetext.com/analysis/new-trial-newly-discovered-evidence

Kleiman, A. (1939). Appeals and challenges against judgements and decisions in civil cases. Moscow: Juridizdat NKYU SSSR, 1939. S. 17.

Kolesnyk, R.M. (2018). Grounds for reviewing decisions of commercial courts for newly discovered circumstances. (PhD Dissertation). Institute of Economic and Legal Research of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. http://www.iepd.kiev.ua/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/%90_%90_%91'%90_%91_%90%E7%91%22%90%E7%91_%90%F8%91'-%90_%90_%90%3E%90%E7%91_%90_%90%F1%90%F3.pdf

Lavrov, V. (2020). Review of judgments due to newly discovered circumstances in the context of the right to a fair trial in civil cases. Entrepreneurship, economy and law, No. 6, pp. 39-43. http://pgp-journal.kiev.ua/archive/2020/6/9.pdf

Law of Ukraine No. 1500-06. Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine. Official Web site of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, July 18, 1963. Available online. In: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1501-06#Text

Law of Ukraine No. 1618-IV. Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine. Official Web site of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, March 18, 2004. Available online. In: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1618-15/conv#n9040

Meniuk, D. (2021). The review of court decisions on newly discovered or exceptional circumstances in the civil proceedings of Ukraine. (PhD Dissertation). Institute of State and Law of V.M. Koretsky National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. http://idpnan.org.ua/files/2021/menyuk-d.o.-pereglyad-sudovih-rishen-za-novoviyavlenimi-abo-viklyuchnimi-obstavinami-u-tsivilnomu-protsesi-ukrayini.pdf

Vaskovskyi, E. (2016). Course on civil procedure: subjects and subjects of the proceedings, procedural relations and actions. Moscow: Statut. http://www.consultant.ru/edu/student/download_books/book/vaskovskij_ev_kurs_grazhdanskogo_processa/

White, P. J. (2000). “Newly Available, Not Newly Discovered”. The journal of appellate practice and process, 2(1), pp. 7-18. https://lawrepository.ualr.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1186&context=appellatepracticeprocess

Zeldina, O. and Kolesnik, R. (2017). The institution of review of court decisions for newly discovered circumstances. Law and Society, No. 4, pp. 89-95. http://pravoisuspilstvo.org.ua/archive/2017/4_2017/part_1/18.pdf