Ravil Kassilgov, Partner
Over the past one and a half months, there has been a sharp increase in cases of claims being dismissed without consideration by the courts on unconvincing grounds, particularly under subparagraph 1 of Article 279 of the Civil Procedure Code (failure to comply with the pre-trial procedure).
One of the reasons is the outflow of judges to the specialised administrative courts (SAC), which has led to an increased workload on the remaining judges. As a result, they resort to dismissing claims without consideration as a means of reducing the caseload.
Examples:
Consequences:
It is important to consider the risk of the dispute shifting into the scope of the Administrative Procedural Code and, in some cases, even voluntarily opting for this route to benefit from its advantages.
Over the past one and a half months, there has been a sharp increase in cases of claims being dismissed without consideration by the courts on unconvincing grounds, particularly under subparagraph 1 of Article 279 of the Civil Procedure Code (failure to comply with the pre-trial procedure).
One of the reasons is the outflow of judges to the specialised administrative courts (SAC), which has led to an increased workload on the remaining judges. As a result, they resort to dismissing claims without consideration as a means of reducing the caseload.
Examples:
- In a contractual dispute, a newly appointed judge refused to consider the claim, reasoning that the pre-trial claim covered the entire debt amount, not just the part being recovered.
- In a dispute with a state authority, the court declined to consider the claim due to the absence of an appeal to a higher authority, although such an appeal was not mandatory at the time the claim was filed.
Consequences:
- In commercial disputes, the claim may be resubmitted after the deficiencies are remedied.
- In administrative disputes, claimants risk falling under the scope of the new Administrative Procedural Code, where pre-trial appeal is mandatory, potentially complicating the protection of rights.
It is important to consider the risk of the dispute shifting into the scope of the Administrative Procedural Code and, in some cases, even voluntarily opting for this route to benefit from its advantages.