The strength of the court decision, which came into force. Lawyer consulting
Winning a court is not a victory. This is only a temporary advantage. Finally, everything ends when the force of the court decision comes into force. About this in more detail.
What is the force of a court decision that came into force
A bit of theory. The strength of the decision of the court, which entered into legal force, presupposes mandatory execution of the verdict for all participants in the process.
This means that after the victory in the processit is necessary to wait for a certain time, after which it is already possible to drink champagne. How much depends on the nature of the litigation. When does the court decision come into force? There are common principles for common civil cases. Time depends on whether the other party filed an appeal against the verdict or not. If not, the court's decision on the case is final only after a possible time limit for filing an appeal. For example, if you have 30 days to appeal, then on day 31, you can celebrate success in court. But here everything is conditional. The opponent can restore the deadline for filing an appeal. In this case, the decisiveness of the decision is postponed until the meeting of the collegium of the Regional Court. Only after the appeal the verdict finally comes into force.
Of course, you can cancel it in cassation instances. For example, there are two civil cases:
- Presidiums of regions.
- Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.
On filing in civil cases in boththe above-mentioned instances are given six months, on criminal - unlimited. But even if a half-year period is missed, the other party can restore the procedural deadline for filing. Of course, without good reason, it's so easy not to do it, but, as practice shows, they are always for those who need it. Therefore, the decisions of the RF courts can be permanently canceled and changed.
If the other party within the allotted time periodappeals the verdict of the first instance, then in this case it is finally possible to rejoice after the meeting of the Appeals Board of the regional court. The timing will naturally be prolonged.
For example, a court decision for violationloan agreement. The debtor was obliged to repay the required amount. The appeal is given to him for 30 days. It is after this period that the decision will come into force. However, do not forget that under certain conditions he can restore it.
In case the debtor submitted an appeal within 29 days, then it would be necessary to wait for the meeting of the Judicial Board, which makes final decisions.
The concept of absentee decisions
The most incomprehensible question for ordinary citizens: "When does the court's judgment in absentia enter into legal force?" This question gives birth to a myth among inexperienced lawyers. It lies in the fact that, under certain conditions, a correspondence decision can never enter into force if one does not receive a copy of the verdict.
This is due to incorrect interpretation of normscivil procedure code. According to him, within seven days after receiving a copy of the decision in absentia, a citizen has the right to cancel it. Within a month after refusal to satisfy the request for cancellation or after the deadline for this procedural action, he must appeal. Consequently, if the court ruled, and a copy of it is "not seen" in the mailbox and does not appear personally to the court personally, it will never enter into legal force.
This theory is broken about the irreconcilable faces of employees of the Federal Bailiff Service, which block all bank accounts and seize property.
If no one cancels it, then a decision in absentiacourt comes into force after the end of all the time for filing an appeal. That is, after 40 days (3 days the court makes a reasoned decision, 7 days are given for the possibility of cancellation, 30 days for submission to a higher authority).
The nuances of the restoration of the deadline for the abolition of the absentee decision, or the "Contradictory" interpretation of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation
Restoring the time to cancel the verdict in absentiahas its own nuances. If, from the moment when the court ruled, it took less than the due time to appeal to a higher authority, then you can restore the deadline for filing an application for cancellation. However, the position of the Supreme Court on this issue, to put it mildly, is strange. According to his explanation in the Review of Practice, after the time for filing an appeal has expired, it is not possible to file a petition to restore the time for the cancellation of the verdict. However, this procedural action is allowed to appeal.
Legal logic, to be honest, not exactlyunderstandable. Many lawyers say this. Why one solution can restore the deadline, but the other is not? However, this is apparently a compulsory measure, since the courts of first instance are literally inundated with property and family "disassembly". In a crisis, people stop paying for loans, they get divorced more often. Decisions of the RF courts on these issues are growing rapidly in quantitative terms, which, naturally, affects their quality. Limiting the filing in the first instance, apparently, is intended to slightly "unload" them.
Judicial orders are simplistic verdictsjudges of the peace on small property, some family or economic disputes. They are based on unconditional, from the point of view of jurisprudence, evidence: loan agreements, receipts, acceptance certificates, etc.
The court order differs from the correspondence decisionin that it is relatively easy to cancel. It is enough only to write an objection, without explaining the reasons, and this will be sufficient from the point of view of the civil procedural legislation for its abolition.
The court order comes into force afterten-day period for its appeal. If he is missed through a fault recognized by the court as valid, he can be restored by a proper petition.
The solution is - there is no execution
In Russia, the violation of the court decision is frequent. It manifests itself:
- In inaction, that is, failure to comply with the requirements of the verdict.
- In actions aimed at hindering the implementation of the provisions of decisions.
It is impossible to delay
Some decisions must be executed immediately, you can say, at the exit from the courtroom. These include:
- Payment of wages.
- Restoration of an unlawfully dismissed employee.
- Payment of alimony.
- Adding a voter to the electoral list.
Sanctions for non-compliance
The strength of the court decision, which entered into force,requires its mandatory implementation. But not always citizens fulfill the requirements. For deliberate non-execution, a penalty is provided in the form of an administrative fine.
The debtor is sanctioned for the following actions:
- Refusal to provide information about dismissal from the last place of work.
- Providing false information about property rights.
- Ignoring the requirements of bailiffs.
- Refusal to provide information on the change of work, study, residence.
For individuals, the fine is from 1 thousand to 2.5 thousand rubles; for officials - from 10 thousand to 20 thousand rubles; for legal - from 35 thousand to 100 thousand rubles.
For persons who are not debtors, for non-compliance with the requirements of executive documents, fines are provided in the amounts:
- For individuals - from 2 thousand to 2.5 thousand rubles.
- For officials - from 15 thousand to 20 thousand rubles.
- For legal - from 50 thousand to 100 thousand rubles.
Criminal liability for non-enforcement of court decisions
For certain categories of persons for the failure to comply with a court decision, even criminal liability may occur:
- Employees of municipal institutions.
- Representatives of power structures.
- Employees of state institutions.
However, not any failure to comply with a court decision must necessarily be punished with a "criminal". An important factor in initiating a criminal case is the malicious nature of ignoring.
Who defines "malice"?
The concept of "malice" is not defined in the legislation. However, judicial practice for many years has already accumulated enough precedents that define this concept.
So, according to court decisions, maliciousviolators are those who had the opportunity to fulfill the requirements, but they did not do it purposefully for no apparent reason. They received letters and orders on the immediate fulfillment of the demands from time to time, but they also ignored them. Therefore, do not treat neglect of judicial requirements. As you can see, the consequences can strongly affect the further fate.