A Settlement Agreement in an Administrative Dispute: Problems of Theory and Tendencies in Law Enforcement

The paper has analyzed approaches to the issue of conclusion of a settlement agreement in administrative cases. The author justifies the possibility of conclusion of the settlement agreement in an administrative dispute. The settlement agreement (a conciliation agreement) serves an evidentiary and compromise function and, in the case of a dispute with the antimonopoly authority, may be resorted to as a means of protecting competition by referring in the text of such agreements to specific acts commission of which or omission to commit which is aimed at securing competition. The paper considers the issue of interrelation between the settlement agreement and the agreement on facts of the case in relation to the evidentiary function of the settlement agreement. There is a tendency to expand the use of the institution of the settlement agreement in order to put an end not only to disputes with antimonopoly authorities, but also to cases contesting cadastral value, tax disputes, as well as cases arising in connection with the change of place and/or time of a public event. It is proposed to use foreign experience with regard to the possibility of conclusion of the settlement agreement in administrative cases initiated due to violations of financial markets legislation and the use of insider information.

administrative process, intersectoral institute, institution of a settlement agreement, settlement agreement as a contract, agreement on reconciliation of the parties, agreement on facts of the case, evidentiary function, compromise function

1. Bespalov Yu. F., Bespalov A. Yu., Gordeyuk D. V. i dr. Primiritel’nye procedury v grazhdanskom, ugolovnom i administrativnom sudoproizvodstve Rossijskoj Federacii : nauchno-prakticheskoe posobie. — M. : Prospekt, 2018. — 128 s.

2. Gorshunov D. N. Primirenie storon v administrativnom sudoproizvodstve // Rossijskaya yusticiya. — 2018. — № 4. — S. 40—42.

3. Divin I. M. Administrativnoe sudoproizvodstvo po ekonomicheskim sporam: otdel’nye aspekty razvitiya. — M. : Statut, 2017. — 208 s.

4. Kurnosova S. M. Primiritel’nye procedury kak al’ternativnye sposoby razresheniya spora, praktika ih primeneniya v Shestom arbitrazhnom apellyacionnom sude // URL: http://6aas.arbitr.ru/sites/6aas.arbitr.ru/files/pdf/6.pdf.

5. Nobel’ P. Shvejcarskoe finansovoe pravo i mezhdunarodnye standarty / per. s nem. N. Sirotkina, Yu. Volobueva, V. Ivanova ; nauch. red. I. G. Huber. — 2-e russkoyaz. izd. — M. : Infotropik Media, 2012. — 1104 s.

6. Stepanova O. A. Predely dispozitivnosti v delah ob administrativnyh pravonarusheniyah // Zakon. — 2014. — № 2. — S. 122—128.

7. Shemeneva O. N. Soglashenie o primirenii v administrativnom sudoproizvodstve: principial’naya dopustimost’ i sootnoshenie s mirovym soglasheniem v grazhdanskom processe // Yurist. — 2016. — № 10. — S. 37—40.

8. Shchepalov S. V. Diskrecionnye priemy pri sudebnom tolkovanii administrativnogo zakonodatel’stva // Rossijskaya yusticiya. — 2018. — № 7. — S. 33—38.