About the court decision on civil cases
Normative resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated July 11, 2003 No. 5.
The footnote. The title is in the wording of the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 04/21/2022 No. 5 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
advertisement
In order to ensure the correct and uniform application of the norms of the Civil Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as the CPC) governing the issuance of judicial acts, the plenary session of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan decides:
In accordance with the first part of Article 21 of the CPC, the court of first instance adopts judicial acts in civil cases in the form of court orders, decisions, rulings, and resolutions. The courts of appeal and cassation instances adopt judicial acts in the form of rulings and rulings.
Judicial acts that have entered into legal force, as well as orders, demands, orders, summonses, requests and other appeals of courts and judges in the administration of justice are mandatory for all state bodies, local governments, legal entities, officials, citizens and are subject to execution throughout the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
The judicial act of the court of first instance, which resolves the case on its merits, according to Article 223 of the CPC, is issued in the form of a decision.
The requirements of Article 226 of the CPC on the content of the decision are mandatory for all types of proceedings (simplified (written) proceedings, claim proceedings, special claim and special proceedings).
The footnote. Paragraph 1 as amended by regulatory rulings of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 31.03.2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication); dated 16.03.2018 No. 3 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
1-1. In accordance with the first part of Article 267-4 of the CPC, in a case considered in a simplified (written) procedure, the court makes a decision consisting of introductory and operative parts.
The court, at the written request of the party filed before the court's decision enters into force, is obliged to produce a decision consisting of introductory, motivational and resolute parts.
The court has the right to make such a decision on its own initiative.
By virtue of the third part of Article 267-4 of the CPC, the court is obliged to produce and issue to the parties a decision consisting of introductory, motivational and resolute parts, together with a ruling on the refusal to cancel the decision, if such a decision has not been issued before.
The decision containing the reasoning part must be made no later than five working days from the date of receipt of the petition to the court.
If, for valid reasons, it is impossible to produce a reasoned part of the decision, the decision signed by the judge, consisting of the introductory and operative parts, may be appealed in accordance with the procedure established by the CPC.
The footnote. The regulatory resolution was supplemented by paragraph 1-1 in accordance with the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 04/21/2022 No. 5 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
1-2. Articles 27-1 and 28-1 of the CPC enshrine the right of the regional and equivalent courts, the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan, to claim, accept, consider and resolve, according to the rules of the court of first instance, one of the homogeneous cases (similar in subject matter and grounds of claim, by subject composition), pending before lower courts.
In order to claim and consider a case according to the rules of the court of first instance by a higher court, the court in which the case is pending must obtain the written consent of the parties.
If there is no consent of one of the parties, the case cannot be claimed by the court due to the fact that in accordance with subparagraph 3) Paragraph 3 of Article 77 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan may not change the jurisdiction provided for by law to anyone without his consent.
The issue of requesting and considering one of the homogeneous cases may be initiated by a court of a higher instance, the court in whose proceedings the case is, as well as by the parties or one of the parties.
A decision rendered in one of the homogeneous cases may be used by the courts in accordance with part 5-1 of Article 226 of the CPC.
The footnote. The regulatory resolution was supplemented by paragraph 1-2 in accordance with the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 04/21/2022 No. 5 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
A court order is issued based on indisputable requirements, an exhaustive list of which is contained in Article 135 of the CPC and must comply with the requirements of Article 140 of the CPC in its content, as well as contain explanations on the procedure and deadline for the defendant to file objections to the claimed claim.
The footnote. Paragraph 2 as amended by regulatory rulings of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 03/31/2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication); dated 04/21/2022 No. 5 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
The decision is made in the name of the Republic of Kazakhstan in strict accordance with the law and the facts established by the court in a particular case.
Explanations of the parties, third parties participating on the side of the plaintiff or the defendant, other persons participating in the case, testimony of witnesses, expert, explanations of the specialist are given in the decision from a third party, briefly, on the merits of the dispute.
In case of lengthy explanations, indications and explanations, it is allowed to make references to audio and video recordings with an accurate indication of the time interval.
The following are not allowed in the text of the decision: excessive detailing of events and circumstances; quoting legal norms that are not relevant to the dispute; using abbreviations and words that are not accepted and are not used in official documents; making corrections that are not stipulated by the court.
The decision is made in conditions that exclude the presence of unauthorized persons and the disclosure of the secrets of the meeting. The decision is set out in writing and can be produced in handwritten, typewritten or computer-generated form in one copy.
In the case of a handwritten or typewritten decision, a copy of it must be executed by computer in accordance with the internal documents of the judicial system regulating issues of legal technology and the parameters of drafting judicial acts.
After making and signing the court's decision, the judge announces the decision in full or its operative part. The announced operative part of the decision must be signed by the judge and attached to the case.
According to part 4-1 of Article 223 of the CPC, if it is impossible for valid reasons to produce a final decision, the operative part of the decision signed by the judge may be appealed in accordance with the procedure established by the CPC.
If the persons participating in the case and their representatives do not appear, the decision will not be announced at the court session, which will be noted in the minutes of the court session.
The court has the right to postpone the announcement of the decision within the time limit provided for in the second part of Article 183 of the CPC, but not for more than five working days. In this case, the final decision must be made before it is announced.
The date of the decision is the day of the announcement of the decision on the case.
The place of the decision is determined by the name of the city or other locality where the decision was made.
The announcement of oral conclusions that are not written in accordance with the law and are not signed by a judge is not a judicial decision.
The footnote. Paragraph 3 as amended by the normative resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 03/16/2018 No. 3 (effective from 09/01/2018); as amended by the normative resolutions of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 09/10/2018 No. 14; dated 04/21/2022 No. 5 (effective from the date of the first official publication). 4. Excluded by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 31.03.2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
According to Article 224 of the CPC, the court's decision must be lawful and justified.
A decision is lawful when it is made in compliance with the norms of procedural law and in full compliance with the norms of substantive law applicable to this legal relationship, or is based on the application, if necessary, of a law governing a similar relationship, or proceeds from the general principles and meaning of civil legislation and the requirements of good faith, reasonableness and fairness (article 5 The Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan and Article 6 of the CPC ).
A decision is considered justified if it reflects facts relevant to the case, confirmed by evidence examined by the court that meet the requirements of the law on their relevance, admissibility and reliability, or are well-known circumstances that do not need to be proven and are collectively sufficient to resolve the dispute.
The footnote. Paragraph 5 as amended by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 31.03.2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
Judicial acts in the form of decisions are issued when considering the case on the merits. It is unacceptable to include in the operative part of the decision the conclusions of the court on the part of the claims that were not considered in substance. The court's conclusions on these requirements should be set out in a judicial act separate from the decision in the form of a ruling (on leaving the application without consideration, on termination of the proceedings).
In accordance with Article 226 of the CPC, when resolving a dispute on the merits, the court makes a decision consisting of introductory, descriptive, motivational and resolute parts, the content of which must meet the requirements provided for in parts three, four, five and six of this article.
In the reasoning part of the decision, the evidence may be stated without disclosing its full content.
By virtue of the second part of Article 222 of the CPC, after the announcement of the court decision, the presiding judge orally explains the legal grounds and consequences of its adoption. In case of ambiguity of this explanation, the parties are given the opportunity to ask clarifying questions, about which a corresponding note is made in the minutes of the court session.
If the persons participating in the case do not appear, the decision will not be clarified.
The footnote. Paragraph 7 as amended by the normative resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated December 29, 2012 No. 6 (effective from the date of official publication); as amended by the normative resolutions of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 03/31/2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication); dated 03/16/2018 No. 3 (effective from 09/01/2018); from 09/10/2018 No. 14; dated 04/21/2022 No. 5 (effective from the date of the first official publication). 8. Excluded by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated December 29, 2012 No. 6 (effective from the date of its official publication).
When drafting the introductory part, it is necessary to be guided by the third part of Article 226 of the CPC.
The personal data of an individual about the surname, first name, patronymic (if any) must be indicated in accordance with the entry in the official identity document.
In cases where the proceedings are conducted in Russian, and the surname, first name, patronymic of the person indicated in the identity documents are in the official language, the decision must indicate the personal data of the person, without bending, in exact accordance with the entry in the official identity document.
The surname, first name and patronymic of the foreign person in the court decision are indicated both in the language of production and in the transcription indicated in the identity document.
The identity of an individual is verified on the basis of documents, the list of which is provided for in paragraph 1 of Article 6 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated January 29, 2013 No. 73-V "On Identity documents".
If the party is a legal entity, then its name should be indicated in accordance with the documents on state registration.
When a plaintiff, a third party making independent claims on the subject of a dispute, or a defendant in a counterclaim claims several claims, each of them is subject to numbering.
Subsequently, in the decision, with the exception of the operative part, it is allowed not to provide the full text of the stated requirements, but to indicate the requirement number - requirement No. 1, requirement No. 2, etc.
The footnote. Paragraph 9 as amended by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 03/16/2018 No. 3 (effective from 09/01/2018); as amended by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 09/10/2018 No. 14.
In the descriptive part, in addition to the requirements of the fourth part of Article 226 of the CPC, the indisputable facts preceding the dispute and directly related to it are summarized. At the same time, full reproduction and copying of the claim and the response to the claim is not allowed.
The content of the stated claims, including if the plaintiff has changed the grounds or subject of the claim or reduced its size, should be reflected in the descriptive part of the decision.
If, on the grounds provided for in Article 154 of the CPC, the court accepted a counterclaim for consideration, then the descriptive part also indicates the content of the counterclaim.
In addition, the descriptive part of the decision should contain the objections of the defendant and the explanations of other persons involved in the case.
The descriptive part also sets out the petitions submitted to be resolved by the court when making a decision (on the application of the limitation period, reduction of the penalty, the appeal of the decision for immediate execution, and others).
The footnote. Paragraph 10 as amended by the normative resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 03/16/2018 No. 3 (effective from 09/01/2018); as amended by the normative resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 04/21/2022 No. 5 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
The reasoning part begins with a statement of the legal norms on the basis of which the court made the decision. Based on their content, the court determines the range of circumstances relevant to the case.
In accordance with Article 225 of the CPC, an assessment of the evidence provided allows the court to conclude which circumstances relevant to the case have been established and which have not.
A unilateral presentation of the arguments and evidence of the party in whose favor the court made the decision is not allowed in the decision. The court is obliged to indicate on what grounds it did not accept the arguments of the other party and did not apply those rules of substantive law to which this party referred.
In case of cancellation by a court of a higher instance of a judicial act (judicial acts) and referral of the case for a new hearing, the court is obliged to indicate the reasons for the inability to comply with the provisions set out in the decision of the court of appeal or cassation instance.
The decision cannot be based on assumptions about the circumstances of the case. The court has no right to refer in its decision to evidence that has not been examined at the court session. The court bases its decision only on those evidences, the participation in the study of which was provided to each party on an equal basis.
If the collection of evidence was carried out in the order of execution of a court order, the court has the right to substantiate the decision with these evidences, provided that they are announced and examined at a court hearing. If the persons participating in the case or the witnesses who gave explanations or testimony to the court that carried out the assignment in accordance with Article 74 of the CPC appear in the court considering the case, they give explanations and testimony in the general order.
In accordance with the procedure provided for in Articles 69, 70, 71 of the CPC, procedural actions may be carried out to ensure evidence. The evidence collected in this case (protocols and other materials) The court also has the right to justify the decision, provided that this evidence is examined at a court hearing.
In accordance with the first part of Article 46 of the CPC, persons participating in the case have the right, among other things: to give oral and written explanations to the court; to present their arguments on all issues arising during the trial; to participate in court debates by presenting the texts of voiced speeches and the proposed wording (draft) of the court decision; to use other procedural to protect and restore violated or disputed rights, freedoms, and legitimate interests.
The footnote. Paragraph 11 as amended by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 03/16/2018 No. 3 (effective from 09/01/2018); as amended by the regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 04/21/2022 No. 5 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
The expert's opinion has no advantage over other evidence and is not binding on the court. It should be evaluated in conjunction with other evidence. The evaluation of the expert's opinion should be given in the reasoning part of the decision. In this case, the court must indicate what the expert's conclusions are based on, whether the materials submitted for examination have been fully examined, and whether they have carried out an appropriate analysis. The court is obliged to motivate disagreement with the expert's opinion in the decision.
If the examination is entrusted to several experts who have given separate opinions on the issues of expert research, the court must provide arguments for agreement or disagreement with the conclusion of each expert.
Oral explanations of an expert given at a court hearing may be evidence in accordance with part six of Article 92 of the CPC only in part of the explanation of the conclusion given by him earlier.
The footnote. Paragraph 12 as amended by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 31.03.2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
By virtue of Article 76 of the CPC, a court verdict that has entered into legal force in a criminal case, which recognizes the right to satisfy a claim, is mandatory for a court considering a case on the civil consequences of the acts of the person against whom the verdict was passed. In addition, such a verdict has a prejudicial significance on the issues of whether these acts took place and whether they were committed by this person, as well as in relation to other circumstances established by the verdict and their legal assessment. The court considering the claim arising from such a criminal case does not have the right to discuss the defendant's guilt, however, it has the right to cite in the reasoning part of the decision the evidence available in the civil case substantiating the amount awarded (for example, taking into account the defendant's property status or the victim's guilt).
The circumstances established by a court decision that has entered into legal force in a previously considered civil case are binding on the court and are not proven again when considering other civil cases, provided that the same persons participate in them.
The footnote. Paragraph 13 as amended by regulatory rulings of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 31.03.2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication); dated 31.05.2019 No. 5 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
Within the meaning of Article 48 of the CPC, recognition of a claim is the defendant's right. If the recognition of the claim by the defendant does not violate anyone's rights, freedoms and legitimate interests, and does not contradict the law, the court may indicate in the reasoning part of the decision that the claim has been recognized and accepted by the court.
The footnote. Paragraph 14 as amended by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 31.03.2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
If the court, having assessed the evidence individually and in its entirety, finds that some of the submitted materials, witness statements, and other factual data do not confirm the circumstances to which the parties referred as the grounds for their claims and objections, then it is obliged to substantiate the conclusions about this in the reasoning part of the decision.
When it is established at a court hearing that a party is withholding and not presenting evidence relevant to the proper resolution of the dispute at the request of the court, the court, in the reasoning part of the decision, based on the totality of the evidence, evaluates the information contained in this evidence, taking into account the requirements provided for in part nine of Article 73 of the CPC.
In the reasoning part of the decision, it is necessary to indicate the substantive law applied by the court to these legal relations and the procedural rules that guided the court.
The footnote. Paragraph 15 as amended by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 31.03.2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
In accordance with part two of Article 225 and part two of Article 48 of the CPC, the court resolves the case within the limits of the plaintiff's claims and does not have the right to change the subject matter or the basis of the claim on its own initiative. The court has the right to go beyond the stated requirements only in cases expressly provided for by law. Thus, when making a decision on the restriction or deprivation of parental rights, the court has the right to simultaneously resolve an undeclared claim for the recovery of child support (paragraph 3 of Article 76, paragraph 5 of Article 79 of the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Marriage (Matrimony) and Family").
The subject of the claim is determined by the specific requirements of the plaintiff (applicant) and is defined as a substantive requirement indicating the nature of the violation or threat of violation of the rights, freedoms or legitimate interests of the applicant.
The basis of the claim should be understood as the facts indicated by the interested party, entailing the emergence, modification or termination of the material legal relationship that is the subject of the claim.
An increase or decrease in the amount of claims cannot be considered as a change in the subject matter of the claim, since it is a question of clarifying the scope of the claim.
The footnote. Paragraph 16, as amended by regulatory rulings of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 12/29/2012 No. 6 (effective from the date of official publication); dated 03/31/2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication); dated 03/16/2018 No. 3 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
The operative part of the decision must contain the court's conclusion on the satisfaction of the claim or on the rejection of the claim in whole or in part, arising from the factual circumstances established in the reasoning part.
The court is obliged to state the operative part of the decision clearly and clearly so that there are no ambiguities and disputes during the execution of the decision.
The decision is made on all the claims made by the plaintiff.
If several claims are combined into one proceeding, or the court accepts for consideration a counterclaim, or a claim by a third party who has made independent claims on the subject of the dispute, the operative part of the decision should state exactly what the court decided on each claim, who, what specific actions and in whose favor should be performed, for which side the disputed right is recognized.
The court has no right to resolve the issue of the rights and obligations of persons not involved in the case.
Other issues specified in the law should also be resolved, namely: court costs have been allocated, the procedure and time limit for appealing a court decision, the time limit for applying a decision for execution, and the measures taken to ensure and enforce it.
When making a decision to reject the stated claims in whole or in part, it is necessary to specify exactly to whom, in respect of whom, and what is denied.
The footnote. Paragraph 17 as amended by Resolutions of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 03/16/2018 No. 3 (effective from the date of the first official publication); dated 04/21/2022 No. 5 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
In accordance with Article 102 of the CPC, court costs consist of state fees and costs related to the proceedings.
When determining the amount of the state fee, the court must be guided by the norms of the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Taxes and Other Mandatory Payments to the Budget" (Tax Code).
The costs associated with the proceedings in the case amount to the actual costs incurred by the persons concerned during the consideration and resolution of the case, as well as the execution of the decision rendered on it. An approximate list of costs related to the proceedings is contained in Article 108 of the CPC.
By virtue of Article 109 of the CPC, the court awards the party in whose favor the decision was made, on the other hand, all court costs incurred in the case, even if this party was exempt from paying them.
If the plaintiff rejects the claim, the defendant will not reimburse the court costs incurred by him. The plaintiff reimburses the defendant for the court costs incurred by him in connection with the conduct of the case. If the plaintiff refuses to maintain his claims as a result of the defendant's voluntary satisfaction of them after filing a claim, the court, at the request of the plaintiff, shall recover from the defendant all court costs incurred. If the filing of a claim is not caused by the defendant's culpable behavior, then the court costs are borne by the plaintiff if the claim is recognized by the defendant in court.
If the claim is partially satisfied, the court awards the costs incurred by the plaintiff in proportion to the amount of the claims satisfied by the court, and to the defendant in proportion to the part of the claims denied to the plaintiff.
Courts should keep in mind that the costs of paying for the assistance of a representative participating in the process may be recovered in the amount of the costs actually incurred by the party, but the amount of the recoverable amount for monetary claims may not exceed ten percent of the satisfied part of the claim (Article 113 of the CPC). According to non-property requirements, the amount of expenses is collected within reasonable limits, but should not exceed three hundred monthly calculation indices.
When making decisions in cases in which there are several defendants, court costs are collected from them in equity, not in solidarity.
The footnote. Paragraph 18 as amended by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 31.03.2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
18-1. If a dispute has arisen as a result of a violation by a person participating in the case of a claim or other pre-trial dispute settlement procedure provided for by law or contract, including a violation of the deadline for responding to a claim or leaving a claim unanswered, the court shall charge this person with court costs regardless of the outcome of the case.
The court has the right to attribute all court costs in the case to a person who abuses procedural rights or fails to perform procedural duties, including in the case of providing evidence in violation of the time limit set by the court and the procedure established by the CPC for providing evidence without valid reasons, if this led to a delay in the trial, hindering the consideration of the case and the adoption of a lawful and reasonable judicial act.
The footnote. The regulatory resolution was supplemented by paragraph 18-1 in accordance with the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 31.03.2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
When satisfying a claim in cases of recognition of a right, the court is obliged to indicate in the operative part of the decision not only the existence of the right, but also the legal consequences that such recognition entails (for example, if a marriage is declared invalid, the record of registration of such a marriage is annulled).
In accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 127 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the tenge is a legal tender that must be accepted at face value throughout the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan. With regard to Article 229 of the CPC, when satisfying claims for the recovery of monetary amounts, the courts must indicate in the operative part of the decision the amount of the amount to be recovered in numbers and words in the monetary unit of the Republic of Kazakhstan - tenge. When collecting periodic payments, the court must specify the period during which the collection is carried out.
In the case of a claim for the recovery of a sum of money in a foreign currency, the court is obliged in the reasoning part of the decision to provide calculations for the transfer of foreign currency into tenge at the exchange rate established by the National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the day of the decision.
The court has the right to make a decision on the recovery of a sum of money in foreign currency for legal relations that arose during currency transactions in the cases provided for in Article 6 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated July 2, 2018 No. 167-VI "On Currency Regulation and Currency Control".
The footnote. Paragraph 20, as amended by regulatory rulings of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 12/29/2012 No. 6 (effective from the date of official publication); dated 03/31/2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication); dated 04/21/2022 No. 5 (effective from the date of the first official publication). 21. Excluded by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 04/21/2022 No. 5 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
In case of satisfaction of the application of citizens or legal entities in cases of recognition of a normative legal act contrary to the law in whole or in part, in the operative part of the decision the court is obliged to declare such act invalid in full or in a separate part from the moment of adoption of the act. The court also obliges the mass media in which the normative legal act was published to publish a notice of the court decision within the time limit set by the court.
When awarding property in kind, the court indicates in the operative part of the decision individually defined characteristics and the value of the property.
When considering disputes concerning the determination of the procedure for the use of property in common ownership or the division of such property (land, housing, etc.), the court is obliged in the operative part to clearly indicate the boundaries and dimensions of the part of the property transferred to each of the parties, the dimensions and boundaries of the part of the property remaining in common use of the parties, the size of and the boundaries of the passageways, the locations of the exits, the installation of fences, the procedure for redevelopment of premises, and other noteworthy circumstances.
The content of the operative part of the decision on certain categories of cases must comply with the norms of substantive and procedural law governing the relations in question.
The footnote. Paragraph 24 is amended by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 04/21/2022 No. 5 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
When terminating the proceedings, the courts should take into account that the grounds provided for in Article 277 of the CPC are not subject to broad interpretation. By terminating the proceedings in accordance with subparagraph 1) of Article 277 of the CPC on the grounds that the dispute is not under the jurisdiction of the court, the court shall indicate in the ruling the authority that is responsible for the case and where the interested person may apply.
Upon termination of proceedings on the grounds of subitems 5) and 6) of Article 277 of the CPC in connection with the conclusion of a settlement agreement or an agreement on the settlement of a dispute (conflict) by way of mediation, an agreement on the settlement of a dispute by way of a participatory procedure and their approval by the court, the operative part of the definition specifies their terms, the procedure for allocating costs and expenses for assistance representatives, if the parties have provided for such an order. In the absence of an agreement between the parties on the procedure for allocating court costs, the court is obliged to resolve this issue in accordance with Articles 113 and 116 of the CPC.
The footnote. Paragraph 25 as amended by the regulatory resolutions of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 31.03.2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
The court leaves the claim without consideration on the grounds specified in Article 279 of the CPC, the list of which is exhaustive. In the ruling, the court is obliged to indicate how to eliminate those listed in the sub-paragraphs 1), 2), 3), 9) and 10) of Article 279 of the CPC, circumstances preventing the case from being considered in court.
The footnote. Paragraph 26 as amended by regulatory rulings of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 03/31/2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication); dated 04/21/2022 No. 5 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
By virtue of Article 235 of the CPC, the court that issued the decision has the right, on its own initiative or at the request of the persons participating in the case, to correct typos or obvious arithmetic errors in the decision. The issue of making corrections may be resolved by the court regardless of whether the decision has been enforced, but within the time limit established by law, during which it may be brought to compulsory execution.
The court has the right, at its discretion, to consider an application for correction of descriptions and obvious arithmetic errors in the decision without summoning the persons involved in the case, or to appoint a court session. The non-appearance of persons duly notified of the time and place of the court session is not an obstacle to the consideration of the application.
The footnote. Paragraph 27 as amended by regulatory rulings of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 03/31/2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication); dated 04/21/2022 No. 5 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
The decision is enforced after its entry into force, except in cases of immediate execution. When making decisions on cases specified in Article 243 of the CPC, the court in the operative part, when satisfying the requirements, indicates the mandatory immediate execution of the court decision.
At the request of the plaintiff, the court has the right to immediately enforce a decision rendered in other categories of cases if, due to special circumstances, a delay in the execution of the decision may lead to significant damage to the recoverer or the execution of the decision may be impossible (for example, loss of property awarded to the plaintiff). The issue of allowing the immediate execution of a court decision may be resolved when making a decision. A request for immediate execution of a decision may also be considered after the decision is rendered, which is considered at a court hearing with the notification of the persons participating in the case about the time and place of the meeting, however, their failure to appear is not an obstacle to resolving this issue. A ruling is issued on the appeal of the decision for immediate execution, which is attached to the case.
The filing of a private complaint or the filing of a motion by the prosecutor for a court ruling on the immediate execution of a court decision issued in accordance with Article 244 of the CPC suspends the execution of such a ruling. A complaint (petition) may not be filed (brought) separately from the court's ruling on the refusal to apply for immediate execution of the decision.
The footnote. Paragraph 28 as amended by regulatory rulings of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 03/31/2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication); dated 03/16/2018 No. 3 (effective from the date of the first official publication); dated 04/21/2022 No. 5 (effective from the date of the first official publication). 29. Abrogated by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 12.01.2009 No. 2 (for the procedure of entry into force, see paragraph 29)
Decisions of foreign courts and arbitrations, according to Article 501 of the CPC, may be enforced in the Republic of Kazakhstan within three years from the date of entry into force of the decision, if this is provided for by law or an international treaty of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The enforcement of such a decision is carried out at the request of the interested party by a ruling of the court of the Republic of Kazakhstan in accordance with the rules on jurisdiction determined by the Civil Procedure Code at the place of execution of the decision.
The application is usually accompanied by:
a duly certified copy of the decision for the enforcement of which permission is sought;
an official document stating that the decision has entered into force, if this circumstance is not visible from the text of the decision.;
evidence confirming the proper notification of the party or its representative in the event of the procedural incapacity of the party against whom the decision was made about the process;
an executive document with a note on the partial execution of the decision, if any;
in cases of contractual jurisdiction, a document confirming the agreement of the parties on this issue.
The court considering an application for recognition and authorization of the compulsory execution of a decision is limited to establishing the circumstances under which the compulsory execution of the decision is possible.
The court has the right to refuse the compulsory execution of a court decision upon presentation of evidence by the other party in respect of which permission to enforce the court decision is sought.:
dispute resolution by an incompetent court;
consideration of the case in the absence of a party who has not been notified of the process;
expiration of the three-year limitation period for the submission of a decision for enforcement;
the existence of a decision that entered into force earlier between the same parties, on the same subject and on the same grounds.
The footnote. Paragraph 30 as amended by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 31.03.2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
The court has the right, in accordance with Article 239 of the CPC, to make a ruling on the indexation of the awarded sums of money. Indexation is calculated for the period from the date of entry into force of the decision until the day of the debtor's actual fulfillment of the monetary obligation, with the exception of the period of deferral or installment, based on the base rate of the National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the day of execution of the court decision.
The court has the right, at its discretion, to consider an application for indexation of the awarded sums of money without summoning the persons involved in the case, or to appoint a court hearing. The non-appearance of persons duly notified of the time and place of the court session is not an obstacle to the consideration of the application. The materials on the application for indexing the awarded amounts are attached to the materials of the civil case.
It is not allowed to collect indexation of those monetary amounts that are recovered by a court ruling in accordance with Article 239 of the CPC.
The footnote. Paragraph 31, as amended by regulatory rulings of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 06/29/2009 No. 6; dated 03/31/2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication); dated 04/21/2022 No. 5 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
An additional decision may be rendered by a court only in the cases specified in Article 236 of the CPC and only on the basis of factual circumstances that were established during the hearing of the case within the time limit established by law for the execution of the decision.
If an appeal is filed against a court decision or an appeal petition is filed and at the same time the issue of making an additional decision is raised, the court must first resolve the issue of making an additional decision at a court hearing, and then send the case to the court of appeal for consideration.
The court may not, under the guise of making an additional decision, change the content of the decision or resolve new issues that were not investigated at the court session.
The footnote. Paragraph 32, as amended by regulatory rulings of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 03/31/2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication); dated 03/16/2018 No. 3 (effective from the date of the first official publication); dated 04/21/2022 No. 5 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
In case of ambiguity of the decision, the court that resolves the case has the right to clarify the decision at the request of the persons participating in the case, as well as at the request of the bailiff. Clarification of the decision is not allowed if it has been enforced or the time period stipulated by law has expired, during which the decision may be submitted for enforcement.
When explaining the decision, the court has no right to change its content, as well as to discuss issues that are not reflected in the court's decision.
According to the second part of Article 237 of the CPC, an application for clarification of a decision is allowed by a judge without holding a court session. The persons participating in the case are notified of the receipt of such an application and have the right to send a response to it to the court.
The footnote. Paragraph 33 as amended by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 04/21/2022 No. 5 (effective from the date of the first official publication). 34. Abrogated by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 06/29/2009 No. 6.35. Excluded by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 04/21/2022 No. 5 (effective from the date of the first official publication). The footnote. Paragraph 36 as amended by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 31.03.2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
In accordance with Article 234 of the CPC, copies of the decision are sent or issued to the parties and other persons involved in the case who did not appear at the court session no later than three working days from the date of the final decision using means of communication that record its receipt.
The footnote. Paragraph 37 as amended by the regulatory decree of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 31.03.2017 No. 2 (effective from the date of the first official publication).
According to article 4 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, this regulatory resolution is included in the current law, and is also generally binding and comes into force from the date of its official publication.
Application
The footnote. The regulatory resolution was supplemented by an appendix in accordance with the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 03/16/2018 No. 3 (effective from 09/01/2018); excluded by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 09/10/2018 No. 14.
Chairman of the Supreme Court
© 2012. RSE na PHB "Institute of Legislation and Legal Information of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan
Constitution Law Code Standard Decree Order Decision Resolution Lawyer Almaty Lawyer Legal service Legal advice Civil Criminal Administrative cases Disputes Defense Arbitration Law Company Kazakhstan Law Firm Court Cases
