Preview

Actual Problems of Russian Law

Advanced search

Decision and Prescription of the Antimonopoly Body as Objects of Dispute in the “Arbitrazh” (State Commercial) Court

https://doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2020.111.2.113-124

Abstract

Based on the analysis of judicial practice and science, the paper substantiates that the decision of the antimonopoly body on violation of the antimonopoly legislation by an economic entity and the injunction issued on its basis can be attributed to public non-regulatory legal acts, and challenging them can be referred to as proceedings on cases arising from public legal relations. The author highlights some problems of theoretical and practical nature of a separate dispute of a decision and a prescription. It is justified that challenging the decision and prescription separately is impractical. In cases of challenging only the decision or only the order of the antimonopoly body, a state commercial court, in case of doubts about the legality of both acts, may, on its own initiative, check for the legality of both of these public non-regulatory legal acts, going beyond the stated requirements. The author substantiates that the existence of two non-regulatory legal acts of the antimonopoly body (decisions and prescriptions) is unjustified and, over time, the decision and prescription of the antimonopoly body can be reduced to one act — the decision of the antimonopoly body.

About the Author

N. A. Ivanova
Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL), SOGAZ-Med Insurance Company JSC
Russian Federation
Postgraduate Student of the Department of Civil and Administrative Procedure

ul. Sadovaya-Kudrinskaya, d. 9, Moscow, Russia, 125993



References

1. Alekseev S. S. Problemy teorii prava : kurs lekcij : v 2 t. — Sverdlovsk, 1973. — T. 2—402 s.

2. Arbitrazhnyj process : uchebnik / pod red. R. E. Gukasyana. — M. : Prospekt, 2006. — 448 s.

3. Arbitrazhnyj process : uchebnik. — 5-e izd., pererab. i dop. / otv. red. V. V. Yarkov. — M. : Infotropik Media, 2012. — 880 s.

4. Bahrah D. N. Administrativnoe pravo : uchebnik. — 5-e izd., pererab. i dop. — M. : Eksmo, 2010. — 607 s.

5. Vasil’ev R. F. Pravovye akty organov upravleniya : uchebnoe posobie. — M. : Izd-vo MGU, 1970. — 107 s.

6. Vengerov A. B. Teoriya gosudarstva i prava : uchebnik. — 4-e izd. — M. : Omega-L, 2007. — 607 s.

7. Voplenko N. N. Akty primeneniya prava. Obshchaya teoriya gosudarstva i prava : akademicheskij kurs: v 3 t. — Izd. 2-e, pererab. i dop. / pod red. M. N. Marchenko. — M. : Zercalo-M, 2001. — T. 2. — 548 s.

8. Grazhdanskij process : uchebnik dlya bakalavrov / otv. red. V. V. Blazheev, E. E. Uksusova. — M.: Prospekt, 2015. — 736 s.

9. Dyuryagin I. A. Primenenie norm sovetskogo prava: voprosy teorii. — Sverdlovsk, 1973. — 247 s.

10. Kerimov D. A. Kodifikaciya i zakonodatel’naya tekhnika. — M. : Gosyurizdat, 1962. — 209 s.

11. Kozlov Yu. M. Administrativnoe pravo : uchebnik. — M. : Yurist", 2007. — 554 s.

12. Kozlov Yu. M. Administrativnye pravootnosheniya. — M. : Yurid. lit., 1976. — 184 s.

13. Kommentarij k Grazhdanskomu kodeksu Rossijskoj Federacii, chasti pervoj (postatejnyj) / otv. red. O. N. Sadikov. — M., 1997. — 778 s.

14. Lazarev V. V. Primenenie sovetskogo prava. — Kazan’, 1972. — 200 s.

15. Mihalyak Ya. S. Primenenie socialisticheskogo prava v period razvernutogo stroitel’stva kommunizma. — M., 1963. — 44 s.

16. Mickevich A. V. Akty vysshih organov Sovetskogo gosudarstva. — M. : Yuridicheskaya literatura, 1967. — 176 s.

17. Nedbajlo P. E. Primenenie sovetskih pravovyh norm. — M. : Gosyurizdat, 1960. — 511 s.

18. Novosyolov V. I. Zakonnost’ aktov organov upravleniya. — M. : Yurid. lit., 1968. — 108 s.

19. Petrov G. I. Sovetskoe administrativnoe pravo. Chast’ obshchaya. — L. : Izd-vo LGU, 1960. — 344 s.

20. Popov L. L., Migachyov Yu. I., Tihomirov S. V. Administrativnoe pravo Rossii : uchebnik / otv. red. L. L. Popov. — M. : Prospekt, 2008. — 688 s.

21. Pravoprimenenie v Sovetskom gosudarstve : uchebnoe posobie / pod red. I. N. Kuznecova, I. S. Samoshenko. — M. : Yurid. lit., 1985. — 303 s.

22. Tihomirov S. V., Kotelevskaya I. V. Pravovye akty : uchebno-prakticheskoe posobie. — M. : Yuridicheskij kolledzh MGU, 1995. — 158 s.

23. Uksusova E. E. Grazhdanskoe sudoproizvodstvo kak processual’naya forma i potencial vozmozhnostej s pozicij specializacii na sovremennom etape // Vestnik imeni Universiteta O.Е. Кутафafina (MGYuA). — 2015. — № 9. — S. 20—51.

24. Uksusova E. E. Novyj poryadok rassmotreniya del po korporativnym sporam v arbitrazhnyh sudah // Zakony Rossii: opyt, analiz, praktika. — 2010. — № 6. — S. 17—26.

25. Uksusova E. E. Opredelenie nadlezhashchego sudebnogo poryadka po grazhdanskim delam // Zhurnal rossijskogo prava. — 2009. — № 6. — S. 77—92.

26. Yusupov V. A. Pravoprimenitel’naya deyatel’nost’ organov upravleniya. — M. : Yuridicheskaya literatura, 1979. — 136 s.


Review

For citations:


Ivanova N.A. Decision and Prescription of the Antimonopoly Body as Objects of Dispute in the “Arbitrazh” (State Commercial) Court. Actual Problems of Russian Law. 2020;15(2):113-124. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2020.111.2.113-124

Views: 498


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 1994-1471 (Print)
ISSN 2782-1862 (Online)