Facts on the table: the procedure for reviewing court decisions may change in Russia
The list of grounds for launching a review of court decisions will be significantly expanded. Such a bill was approved by the Cabinet of Ministers. Now they will be able to use previously issued decisions on the refusal to initiate cases or their closure, which included false or incorrect information from witnesses or experts. Currently, according to practice, there is no review if such circumstances did not come to light during the court's decision. For more information, see the Izvestia article.
How will decisions be reviewed
The grounds for reviewing court decisions based on newly discovered circumstances will be significantly expanded. Such a document, developed by the Ministry of Justice, was approved on July 7 by the government commission on legislative activity (available to Izvestia). This was reported by sources in the Cabinet.
It is proposed to amend the Civil and Arbitration Procedural Codes, as well as the Code of Administrative Procedure, said Vladimir Gruzdev, Chairman of the Board of the Russian Bar Association.
"In particular, the mechanism for reviewing court decisions that have entered into force due to newly discovered circumstances," he explained.
Currently, the basis for reviewing the case can only be a court decision that has entered into legal force. The changes will allow them to be reviewed if they were based on the criminal actions of participants in the proceedings.
"The amendments clarify that newly discovered circumstances can be established in addition to the verdict by a decision not to initiate criminal proceedings, issued, in particular, in connection with the expiration of the statute of limitations or the application of an amnesty act," the expert added.
For example, if it turns out that the expert gave a false conclusion, but the investigation was eventually terminated, then the persons involved in the case have the right to apply for a review of their court decision.
According to the explanatory note, in 2022, the Investigative Committee issued 106 decisions refusing to institute criminal proceedings under the article on falsification of evidence. In 2023 and 2024, 89 each. According to the article on the imposition of knowingly unlawful sentences, decisions or other judicial acts, there will be three in 2022, one in 2023, and two in 2024. And for deliberately false testimony or expert opinion, 33 such rulings were issued in 2022, 36 in 2023, and 31 in 2024.
Vladimir Gruzdev added that the amendments were developed in connection with the decision of the Constitutional Court of January 2025. The subject of the review was Article 392 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation — "grounds for review of judicial decisions that have entered into force." The Constitutional Court declared it unconstitutional. According to his ruling, it "does not allow for sufficient clarity and certainty to regard as newly discovered those circumstances that are established in the procedures of criminal proceedings."
What the Constitutional Court decided
The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation considered the complaints of Sergey Vishnyakov, a resident of Belgorod, Natalia Volokitina, a resident of Kamchatka, Marat Karimov, a resident of Oktyabrsky in Bashkiria, and Nina Nalivaiko, a Muscovite. As follows from the case file, all of them participated in civil trials and lost them, the decisions have already entered into force. Everyone filed a statement with the police asking them to check whether the evidence had been falsified.
In particular, in the case of Sergei Vishnyakov, law enforcement officers discovered falsification of his signatures on financial documents, which played against him in court. Natalia Volokitina turned out to have forged documents that prevented her from suing the property acquired in marriage. And Nina Nalivaiko lost the trial because the other side of the dispute presented a fake writ of execution.
In each of these cases, the bodies of inquiry or investigation issued decisions to terminate the criminal case or to refuse to initiate it due to the expiration of the statute of limitations. At the same time, some suspects admitted their guilt when they agreed to terminate the criminal case, or did not dispute the facts of forgery, falsification or fraud.
With orders to terminate or refuse to institute criminal proceedings, a group of Russians tried to get the decision reviewed, but the courts refused in all cases. The applicants asked the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation to verify the constitutionality of the norms on the basis of which they received refusals to review the decisions.
"The state has no right to refuse to correct judicial errors caused by criminal behavior (behavior with signs of criminal), to restore victims' rights," the resolution says. "The victim must have the right to defend his violated rights, including property rights."
What will the changes affect?
The revision of judicial acts based on newly discovered circumstances serves as an important mechanism for ensuring legality and justice, said Vladimir Kuznetsov, Chairman of the All-Russian Trade Union of Mediators. However, in practice, certain difficulties arose related to the interpretation and application of the rules governing the grounds for such a revision.
"The existing legal structure often required a court verdict, so that the circumstances revealed during the criminal case could be recognized as newly discovered," he said. — This created a situation where, even if there was convincing evidence obtained during a pre-trial investigation or as a result of the termination of a criminal case, interested parties could not always achieve a review of civil, arbitration or administrative cases.
According to him, this practice led to the fact that judicial acts based on unreliable or falsified evidence could remain in force, violating the principles of justice and the protection of the rights of citizens and organizations.
The amendments bring order to the most informal practice of reviewing judicial acts based on new and newly discovered circumstances, says Ekaterina Kosareva, managing partner of the analytical agency VMT Consult.
"Perhaps, thanks to the innovation, the statistics on case reviews will also change due to the newly discovered circumstances," she added. — Today, on average, one out of five reviewed applications is satisfied by the courts. This is largely due to the lawyers' presentation of new circumstances.
The adoption of the bill will lead to a significant improvement in the mechanisms for protecting the rights and legitimate interests of citizens and organizations, Vladimir Kuznetsov emphasized. The judicial system will become more flexible and fair, as it will be possible to review judicial acts. This will make it possible to more effectively deal with the consequences of falsification of evidence and other criminal encroachments affecting the outcome of civil, arbitration and administrative disputes.
Переведено сервисом «Яндекс Переводчик»
