On the practice of making private rulings by courts in civil cases

Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated June 25, 2010 No. 1.

     The footnote. Throughout the text:

The numbers "253" have been replaced by the numbers "270" in accordance with the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 31.03.2017 No. 2 (effective from the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).

     For the purposes of uniform application by courts of the norms of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan when making private rulings, the plenary session of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan

    Decides:

Private definitions issued in accordance with the procedure established by Article 270 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter referred to as the CPC) are acts of the courts' response to cases of violations of the rule of law.

The grounds for making private determinations are cases of violations of the rule of law revealed at a court hearing.

    Violation of legality should be understood as acts that do not comply with the requirements of regulatory legal acts.

    Improper performance of procedural evidentiary duties by persons participating in the case cannot serve as a sufficient basis for making private determinations.

Courts make private rulings against organizations, officials and other persons performing managerial functions.

    Officials are recognized as persons who permanently, temporarily or by special authority perform the functions of a government representative or perform organizational and administrative functions or administrative and economic functions in state bodies, local governments, as well as in the Armed Forces, other troops and military formations of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

    Other persons performing managerial functions should be understood as the heads of executive bodies of commercial and non-commercial legal entities.

A private ruling is issued by the court in the form of a separate procedural document simultaneously with the judicial act on the case under consideration.

    The footnote. Paragraph 4 as amended by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 09/29/2022 No. 8 (effective from the date of the first official publication).

The content of the private definition must comply with the requirements of Article 269 of the CPC, taking into account the nature of the cases being resolved and violations of the rule of law.

    The reasoning part of the private definition should set out the arguments by which the court concluded that violations of the law had been committed, disclose the essence of the violations, specify specific regulatory legal acts whose requirements had been violated, as well as the persons whose actions (inaction) had led to the violation of the law.

    A particular definition should not contain specific instructions or suggestions regarding the activities of the persons whose interests it concerns, nor does it establish the type and measures of legal responsibility of the perpetrators.

     The operative part of the private definition should indicate the name and location of organizations, as well as explain the provisions of the second part of Article 270 of the CPC on the consequences of non-fulfillment, unanswered or untimely response to a private definition, on the right and procedure for appealing a private definition.

    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).

The issued private definition is announced at the court session on the case under consideration.

According to the first part of Article 270 of the CPC, organizations, officials and other persons performing managerial functions are required to inform the courts about the measures taken on it within one month from the date of receipt of a private ruling.

    The footnote. Paragraph 7 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 case of leaving private definitions without consideration or failure to take measures to eliminate the violations of the law indicated in them, as well as late response to private definitions without valid reasons, the courts have the right to bring officials to administrative responsibility under Article 664 of the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Administrative Offenses.

    The imposition of an administrative penalty does not relieve the relevant officials from the obligation to inform the court about the measures taken under the private definition.

    The footnote. Paragraph 8 as amended by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated December 24, 2014 No. 3 (effective from the date of its official publication).

If the court has not issued a private ruling, despite the existence and sufficiency of grounds for its issuance, the subsequent court instance, verifying the legality of the judicial act, has the right to issue a private ruling itself in accordance with the procedure established by Article 270 of the CPC.

Private complaints may be filed against private definitions, petitions may be filed by the prosecutor, or protests may be filed in accordance with the procedure established by law.

    If persons whose rights and legitimate interests are affected by private rulings did not participate in the consideration of the case, were unaware of the private rulings made against them and/or missed the deadline for appeal established by law, they also have the right to appeal against private rulings.

    The footnote. Paragraph 10 as amended by the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 04/20/2018 No. 7 (effective from the date of the first official publication).

The annulment of a judicial act does not entail the annulment of a private ruling, except in cases where a violation of the legality specified in the private ruling has not been established.

In accordance with article 5 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated November 18, 2015 No. 410-V "On Combating Corruption", Article 4 of the CPC, courts perform state functions aimed at protecting the rights and freedoms of citizens and legal entities by preventing corruption-related offenses, eliminating their consequences and bringing perpetrators to justice.

     If signs of a criminal offense are found in the actions of the parties, other participants in the process, officials and other persons, the courts inform the prosecutors about this.

    The footnote. Paragraph 12, 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).      13. 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).

Invalidate them:

     1) paragraphs two and three of paragraph 30 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated December 22, 2000 No. 16 "On the practice of courts applying legislation on environmental protection";

     2) paragraph 20 of the normative resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated December 22, 2000 No. 17 "On certain issues of application by courts of the legislation on marriage and family when considering cases of adoption of children" (with amendments and additions made by normative resolutions dated December 25, 2006 No. 10 and December 22, 2008 No. 14);

     3) paragraph 21 of the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated July 16, 2007 No. 6 "On certain issues of the application of land legislation by courts".

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 effective from the date of its official publication.

Chairman

The Supreme Court

Republic of Kazakhstan

M. Alimbekov

Judge of the Supreme Court

Republic of Kazakhstan,

Secretary of the plenary session

J. Baishev

© 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