The ABCs of Arbitration Procedure. Courts
Qualified Legal Assistance at Affordable Prices:
https://familylegal.ru/
https://krupps.ru/
Telegram
https://t.me/familylegal
WhatsApp
https://wa.me/79095892329
- - - -
#shorts #law #lawyer
Generally, a court is a link or step in a system. All courts in Russia form a judicial system, which vertically resembles a pyramid. A court is one level of this system, a level of the pyramid, with its own specific functions, distinct from those of the other levels. The levels above it monitor and correct the actions of those below them. They differ from one another in terms of jurisdiction, form of activity, and composition. In the case of arbitration proceedings, these are essentially four judicial levels. Sometimes a fifth instance is distinguished—review based on newly discovered or new circumstances, but we'll discuss that another time; it's a separate topic.
So, four instances. The lawyer you're signing with tells you that they're only charging for the first instance. They're referring to the trial court, which will hear the case on its merits, that is, thoroughly examine it and render a decision. It's in the trial court that all available evidence and the parties' arguments must be presented. This is where the case usually lingers the longest. This court issues a decision. All subsequent instances are then tasked with reviewing appeals against this decision, verifying whether the trial court applied the law correctly and whether it committed any serious procedural violations.
Accordingly, after the trial court issues a decision, the law provides time to appeal the decision. If you disagree with it, you file an appeal. The case, along with your appeal, is then sent to the next level of the system, the appellate court. Here, with a few exceptions, the review is conducted based on the case materials. That is, based on the documents already reviewed in the trial court. And the court's task is to verify whether the lower court reached the correct conclusions based on these materials. Or whether it made a mistake or overlooked something. It's as if a more experienced employee came to check how a younger employee had done their job. They don't start from scratch, but rather review the existing results. If the appellate court agrees with everything, it upholds the trial court's decision and dismisses the appeal. This is statistically the most common occurrence. However, if it disagrees, it amends the trial court's findings—modifies the decision or even reverses it and issues a new one. However, this review comes with a number of limitations. In the appellate court, you can no longer, for example, amend your claims. Or file a counterclaim. Or present new evidence. Or file a motion for an expert opinion. Because you could have already done all of this in the trial court. And due to your own carelessness, you didn't do it, and you only remembered now. Of course, it's a different matter if you tried, and the court that rendered the decision unreasonably rejected your request. You presented evidence, but it wasn't accepted. You requested an expert opinion, without which the dispute would be impossible to resolve, but the court didn't order one. This is where the appellate court can acknowledge your case and correct its colleagues "below."
If you are still unsatisfied with the ruling (which is what the judicial decision rendered by the second instance is called), you have the right to appeal to the next level—file a cassation appeal to the cassation court. But the procedure here is even shorter and more formal. Because this court focuses on the correct application of the law and due process; it doesn't evaluate or establish the factual circumstances of the case. Therefore, most often, this procedure results in either the appeal being dismissed or the judicial decisions being overturned, not with immediate restoration of justice, but with the case being sent back for a new trial, a new round, so to speak. So that the lower courts can sort this out again.
Finally, there's another cassation authority above the district arbitration courts—the Judicial Collegium of the Supreme Court. You can also file an appeal there. However, this body only handles significant, so to speak, egregious violations, so it has a two-stage procedure: first, your appeal is reviewed by a single judge. If they don't see the egregious violations I mentioned, they simply refuse to refer your appeal for consideration at the court hearing. And that's how the appeal process ends in the vast majority of cases. If you're very lucky and your appeal is referred to the Collegium, your chances of a ruling in your favor greatly increase. But these cases are extremely rare in legal practice.
There's an even more unattainable level—the supervisory authority—the Presidium of the Supreme Court. But to get there, you need to appeal the ruling of the Judicial Collegium. Without a strong position, good luck, and a highly experienced lawyer, you're unlikely to ...