The difference between newly discovered and new circumstances in the judicial review process

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to compare new and newly discovered circumstances, which are taken into account by the court when reviewing judicial decisions. The subject of the study is newly discovered circumstances and new circumstances. Research methodology. The following methods are used in the course of the research: normative and dogmatic method, historical method, the method of analyses, logical method, legal and comparative method, method of summarization. Research results. The process of the establishment of the institution of review of court decisions is revealed. The concept of newly discovered circumstances and their place in the system of civil proceedings are considered. The view of the Supreme Court on the interpretation of newly discovered and new circumstances is analyzed. Comparative description of new and newly discovered circumstances is provided. Practical meaning. The differences between new and newly discovered circumstances in the process of reviewing court decisions are identified. Value / originality. The concept of new circumstances in civil proceedings is provided. It is stressed on the necessity for further study of new circumstances and the incorporation of such a list in existing legislation.