The Right to Judicial Protection in the Eurasian Economic Union: Procedural and Substantive Law Aspects

The paper elucidates the problems of judicial competence within the framework of the Eurasian Economic Union and its relationship with national justice. The procedural aspect of the right to judicial protection includes the problem of the interpretation and implementation of international law in the systems of law of the members of the Union. The direct method of implementing the law of the Union is intended to be a priority and it presumes its direct application by national courts. The indirect method involves the implementation of the law of the Union through the consideration of the standings of the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union by national courts. The retrospective consideration of the standings of the Court of the Union through the revision of judicial acts due to new circumstances constitutes a form of the indirect method of introducing the law of the Union into the law of Russia. The substantive law aspect of the right to judicial protection in the Eurasian Economic Union includes the problem of taking from the jurisdiction of the Court of the Union disputes according to the subject and subject matter criteria, namely: restriction on the appeal to the Court of the Union of persons who do not have the status of an economic entity, as well as impossibility of judicial challenge of regulatory legal acts adopted by the bodies of the Union. The main criterion for such an exemption is the lack of formalization of these categories of cases in international law. The author concludes that it is advisable to recreate judicial powers at the union and national levels in this extensive segment of cases. The direct connection between judicial competence and its formalization in the norms of law is impractical due to the objective lag of any lawmaker, including the bodies of the Eurasian Economic Union, from the development of real social relations and new needs associated with the settlement of numerous disputes.

1. Bondar N. S., Dzhagaryan A. A. Pravosudie: orientatsiya na Konstitutsiyu: monografiya. — M.: Norma: Infra-M, 2018. — 224 s.

2. Gordon V. M. Ocherednye voprosy v literature grazhdanskogo protsessa (Literaturnoe obozrenie) // Vestnik grazhdanskogo prava. — 1913. — № 4 (aprel). — S. 133–155.

3. Egorov A. V. Izmenenie zakona kak forma ego autentichnogo tolkovaniya // Zakon. — 2022. — № 5. — S. 14–36.

4. Ispolinov A. S. Evolyutsiya i puti razvitiya sovremennogo mezhdunarodnogo pravosudiya // Lex russica. — 2017. — № 10. — S. 58–87.

5. Muradyan E. M. Preventivnye iski // Gosudarstvo i pravo. — 2001. — № 4. — S. 23–28.

6. Nersesyants V. S. Obshchaya teoriya prava i gosudarstva. — M., 1999. — 552 s.

7. Neshataeva T. N. Uroki sudebnoy praktiki o pravakh cheloveka: evropeyskiy i rossiyskiy opyt. — M.: Gorodets, 2007. — 319 s.

8. Nikitin S. V. Kosvennyy sudebnyy normokontrol: ponyatie i problemy realizatsii // Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava. — 2014. — № 1. — S. 88–101.

9. Nikitin S. V. Sudebnyy kontrol za normativnymi pravovymi aktami v grazhdanskom i arbitrazhnom protsesse: monografiya. — M.: RAP: Volters Kluver, 2010. — 304 s.

10. Problemy razvitiya protsessualnogo prava Rossii: kol. monografiya / A. V. Belyakova, L. A. Voskobitova, A. V. Gabov [i dr.]; pod red. V. M. Zhuykova. — M.: Norma: Infra-M, 2016. — 224 s.

11. Reshetnikova I. V. Sovremennoe protsessualnoe pravo: unifikatsiya ili differentsiatsiya? // Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa. — 2020. — № 2. — S. 32–52.

12. Sokolova N. A. Ukreplenie regionalnoy integratsii: sudebnoe vliyanie // Aktual’nye problemy rossijskogo prava. — 2016. — № 10. — S. 181–189.

13. Fursov D. A. Predmet, sistema i osnovnye printsipy arbitrazhnogo protsessualnogo prava (problemy teorii i praktiki). — M., 1999. — 453 s.