Keywords
common law countries
russian judicial pratica
estoppel
civil proceedings
How to Cite
Abstract
The article is devoted to the actual problem of applying the doctrine of common law countries in Russian legal practice. The relevance of the topic is due to the fact that in recent years, in order to optimize the judicial procedure, there has been a tendency for law enforcement officers to turn to the estoppel doctrine used in common law countries. The research goal is to consider the possibilities and difficulties of applying the estoppel doctrine in Russian judicial practice. The author also considers the feasibility of implementing this institution in the Russian legal field. The research methodology is based on legal analysis and includes methods of the general scientific group (generalization, systematization, comparison), as well as a number of special methods: content analysis of scientific literature on the research topic, as well as doctrinal analysis, critical analysis of judicial practice. As a result of the study, the author concluded: the reception of the doctrine by Russian law should be exclusively systemic and deliberate, and the principles of Russian civil legal proceedings are of decisive importance for clarifying the reception scope of the estoppel doctrine. The borrowing of this institution of common law in the legal system of a country belonging to the continental legal type should not be mechanical.
References
Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. Part 2. Article 9. URL: https://base.garant.ru/12127526/493aff9450b0b89b29b367693300b74a/ (access date: 21.03.2019).
Andrews, N. Andrews on Civil Processes. Court Proceedings, Arbitration & Mediation. Intersentia. Cambridge, Chicago. 2019. – P.480-482.
Black, H.C. Black’s Law Dictionary: Definitions of the Terms and Phrases of American and English Jurisprudence, Ancient and Modern. St. Paul. 1990. – 1956 p.
Civil Procedure: Cases and Materials. St Paul. 1989. – P.1155-1167.
Cooke, E. The Modern Law of Estoppel. Oxford Scholarship Online. 2010. URL: http://proxy.library.Gas Station.ru:2188/view/10.1093/acprof:complete/9780198262220.001.0001/ (access date: 21.03.2019).
Cound, J., Friedenthal, J., Miller, A., Banos, P., Gang, S. Civil procedure. Larchmont. 1998. – P.149 -156.
Emanual, S., Banos, P., Gang, S. Civil procedure. Larchmont, 1998. – 149 p.
Egorkin, S.N. Procedural Estoppel? Part 1. URL: https://zakon.ru/blog/2014/10/21/processualnyj_estoppel_chast_1 (date of access 10.04.2019).
Egorkin, S.N. Procedural Estoppel? Part 2. URL: https://zakon.ru/blog/2014/10/21/processualnyj_estoppel_chast_2 (access date: 10.04.2019).
Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 13(1)(a). URL: https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp (access date: 10.04.2019).
Glannon, J.W. Civil procedure: examples and explanations. New-York. 2001. – P.452-467.
Glazachev, D.I., Ivanova, S.V., Rodionov, L.A. Procedural Estoppel: the struggle with the malversation of law or «judicial arbitrariness». Eurasian Legal Journal. 2018. Vol. 6. – P. 353-355.
Henderson v. Henderson (1843 – 1860) All ER Rep. 378. (1843) 3 Hare 100 at 114-115. URL: https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/D-017-1333?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true (access date: 10.04.2019).
Kashkarova, I.N. Individualization of the lawsuit in the United States of America. Law. 2010. Vol. 4. – P. 39-47.
Kleymenov, A.Ya. On establishing in the Russian civil and arbitration process the consequences of the defendant's waiver of the right to file a counterclaim. The Law. 2011. Vol. 4. – P. 111-112.
Leskina A.I. Estoppel in Russian civilistic Process. Russian juridical journal. 2018. Vol. 1. – P. 111-124.
Plenum Resolution of the SAC of the Russian Federation dated July 23, 2009. № 57 «On some procedural issues of the practice of considering cases related to non-fulfillment or improper fulfillment of contractual obligations». URL: http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_90273/ (access date: 10.04.2019).
Plenum Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of 23.12.2021 № 46 «On the application of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in the consideration of cases in the court of first instance». URL: https://base.garant.ru/403294247/ (access date: 10.04.2019).
Presidium Resolution of the SAC of the Russian Federation dated 22.03.2011. № 13903/10. «Consultant Plus». URL: https://base.garant.ru/403294247/ (access date: 10.04.2019).
SAC of the Russian Federation in the case of the Arbitration Court of the Sverdlovsk Region No A60-62482/2009-C7 of March 22, 2011. № 13903/10. Consultant Plus. URL: https://base.garant.ru/58201696/ (access date: 10.04.2019).
Schwartz, M.Z. Some Reflections on the Institute Estoppel Information. Analytical journal «Arbitration disputes». 2016. Vol. 1. – P. 95-99.
Sedova, Zh.I., Zaitseva, N.V. Estoppel principle and waiver of the right in commercial circulation of the Russian Federation. Moscow. 2014. – 159 p.
Shemeneva, O.N. The principle of estoppel and the requirement of good faith in the implementation of evidentiary activities in civil cases. Bulletin of the civil process. 2019. No. 1. – P. 343-353.
The Arbitration Court Resolution of the Far Eastern District dated 21.08.2019 No. F03-3444/ 2019. URL: https://www.garant.ru/products/ipo/prime/doc/37103486/ (access date: 10.04.2019).
Wright, Ch.A., Miller, A.R., Cooper, E.H. Federal Practice and Procedure; Paragraph 1410. URL: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/BR/158/602/1813607/ (access date: 10.04.2019).
Yakhimovich, A.V. Estoppel in civil proceedings. Abstract of the dissertation for the degree Ph.D. Moscow. 2022. – 22 p.
Zuckerman, A.P. Arbitration by estoppel: can you be compelled to arbitrate even though you never signed an agreement? 2012. – P. 1240-1256.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2023 Lex Humana (ISSN 2175-0947)