ЗАВДАННЯ ТА ПРАВОВІ ПІДСТАВИ УЧАСТІ ОРГАНІВ МІСЦЕВОГО САМОВРЯДУВАННЯ У ЦИВІЛЬНОМУ ПРОЦЕСІ В ІНТЕРЕСАХ ІНШИХ ОСІБ

Abstract

Pursuant to part 1, article 56 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine (CPC), when submitting written proof supporting the existence of substantiating reasons that make it impossible for individual appeals of interested parties to the courts, it is reasonable to apply this provision to the cases in which the participation of a local self-government is optional. Such persons have an official interest, and their participation in the case facilitates to protect the rights and legitimate interests of the minors and disabled participants of civil proceedings. Local self-government bodies may apply to the court in the interests of other persons or enter into the initiated proceedings by themselves or at the request of the court. In addition, such subjects are able to provide conclusions in the exercise of their powers. Taking into consideration the expediency of barring the participation of the local self-government in the case of legal succession or the substitution of an inadequate respondent and the inadmissibility of the participants causing turmoil as to the outcome of the case in their absence, it is suggested to introduce a new edition of part 1, article 56 of the CPC as follows: «The authorities and other persons, who pursuant to article 56 of this Code, applied to the court in the interests of others, have procedural rights and responsibilities of the person on behalf of whom they are acting, with the exception of concluding a settlement agreement; settling the dispute with the participation of a judge; as well as soliciting a motion to further case consideration in their absence.» In order to legally establish the location of the local self-government authority which is to be relevant to the case in question, if the location of the place where the case is being considered differs from the location of the residence of the person in whose interest it is tried, the following third sentence is to be added to part 6, article 56 of the CPC: «The conclusion of the case is declared by the government authorities or local self-government authority of the permanent residence of the complainant or on the place where the object is located to which the conclusion applies.» The extent to which the information given by the local self-government authorities is not a source of proof, the court evaluates the situation accordingly. Taking into consideration that the conclusion drawn by the local self-government authority is broader in context than other methods of substantiation as described in part 2, article 76 of the CPC so far as testimonies of witnesses or written depositions do not take into account a legal assessment of the circumstances of the case, the author supports such legal position and considers it unnecessary to include the conclusions of the local self-government authority as evidence.