Requirement of validity of a judicial decision
The notion of validity is deciphered in paragraph 3 of the ruling of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the USA "On the Judgment". It states, in particular, that the decision is justified when the facts relevant to the case are confirmed by the court-examined evidence that satisfies the requirements of the law on their relevance and admissibility, or circumstances not requiring proof, and also when it contains exhaustive conclusions ships, arising from established facts.
The reasonableness of the decision is directly related to the fulfillment of the tasks of civil and arbitration proceedings. The success of justice in each case depends first of all on how correctly the court has dealt with the circumstances of a particular case, i.e. from the truth and completeness of the facts underlying the decision. The truth in the civil and arbitration process is the correct reflection in the judicial decision of the actual relationships of the parties. The absence of provisions on the principle of objective truth contained in procedural laws of the Soviet period, of course, does not mean that the court should not establish what kind of legal relations have developed between the parties, in particular, whether or not there were legal facts characterizing the mutual relations of the parties . If this can not be achieved, the court's decision can not be justified, but also legal and fair. The decision will be justified, if the court has established every legal fact in the case in exact accordance with the reality. The court's conclusion about the presence or absence of one or another fact will be true if it is based on the evidence available in the case, provided that these evidence is benign (including permissible and attributable), they are sufficient to draw the correct conclusion, and they are correct judged by the court.
How to ...
Tired of looking for a solution?Get Your ESSAY Now!
The reasonableness of the judicial decision covers three interrelated elements:
1) the circumstances of the case, having legal significance for its resolution, which directly relates to the correct definition of the subject of evidence in the case;
2) evidence on the case, which can be used as the basis for a judicial decision only if the rules and procedures for obtaining and investigating them are observed by law;
3) the court's conclusions from an analysis of established circumstances, confirmed by the research evidence.
The court's decision is unreasonable if the court made a logically incorrect conclusion about the relationship of the parties, did not investigate all the circumstances relevant to the case or found the facts established without sufficient evidence, or, on the contrary, found the facts unproven, although the materials of the case imply the opposite conclusion.
Errors that lead to the groundlessness of the judgment may be due to various reasons.
The court in considering a particular civil case is guided by the rule of substantive law and, with its consideration, determines the subject of proof, i.e. those facts that are of material and legal significance. However, it happens that the court, although it applied the proper legal norm, however, failing to find out completely all the facts provided by the hypothesis of this rule and having significant significance for the outcome of the process, as a result takes an unreasonable decision. This may be the result of the fact that the court ignored the parties' references to the facts of the basis of the claim or objections to it. Sometimes the parties themselves, not being interested in having their actual relations opened and properly qualified, are silent about the essential circumstances of their relationship. Thus, because of the misinterpretation and analysis of the hypothesis of the legal norm, facts without legal significance may remain without investigation in the court session and this will entail the incorrect application of the law.
An incorrect evaluation of the evidence given by the court may also lead to a violation of the requirement of justification of the decision. The court assesses the evidence in its internal conviction based on a comprehensive, complete, objective and direct examination of the evidence available in the case (Article 67 of the US CPC, Article 71 of the APC RF).
The decision is considered as unfounded if the fact, which is the basis of the decision, is not supported by sufficient evidence or contradicts it, or the fact that the court finds unsettled, follows from reliable materials of the case.
Ready to make your order?Get your great paper now
In practice, there are cases when the court accepts the means of proof not provided for in the law and bases the judgment on them, i.е. violates the rules of admissibility of evidence (Article 60 of the US GP, Article 68 of the APC RF). Another situation analogous to the consequences arises when the court incorrectly decides whether the evidence is relevant to the case and either rejects the evidence necessary for the case or, on the contrary, brings it to the case, investigates and makes decisions based on unnecessary evidence (Article 59 of the CCP, item 67 of agrarian and industrial complex of the Russian Federation). The consequences of such violations of the procedural law may be the groundlessness of the decision and, accordingly, its cancellation.
In the reasoning part of the decision, the court must specify the material law applied by the court to the established legal relationships, as well as the procedural law by which the court was guided in making the decision, i.e. the court indicates the sources of law, which are named in art. 11 and 1 of the CCP of the USA, art. 13 and 1 of the US APC.
In every judicial decision, it is inevitable to distinguish between its legal and factual aspects. The legal side is connected with the legality of the decision, the factual - with its validity. Legality and validity, being the various requirements imposed on a judicial decision, are interrelated and should not be opposed to each other. Only exact observance of norms and procedural and substantive law guarantees the establishment of all circumstances that are relevant to the case, i.e. making an informed decision.
Also We Can Offer!
- Argumentative essay
- Best college essays
- Buy custom essays online
- Buy essay online
- Cheap essay
- Cheap essay writing service
- Cheap writing service
- College essay
- College essay introduction
- College essay writing service
- Compare and contrast essay
- Custom essay
- Custom essay writing service
- Custom essays writing services
- Death penalty essay
- Do my essay
- Essay about love
- Essay about yourself
- Essay help
- Essay writing help
- Essay writing service reviews
- Essays online
- Fast food essay
- George orwell essays
- Human rights essay
- Narrative essay
- Pay to write essay
- Personal essay for college
- Personal narrative essay
- Persuasive writing
- Write my essay
- Write my essay for me cheap
- Writing a scholarship essay