An application for review of a judicial act in any particular part of it is subject to return.

In accordance with the first part of Article 455 of the CPC, the judicial act as a whole is subject to revision due to newly discovered circumstances or new circumstances.

An application for review of a judicial act in any particular part of it (for example, for review of a judicial act on a counterclaim, on one or more claims combined into one proceeding) is subject to return.

A judicial act that has not entered into legal force is not subject to review due to newly discovered or new circumstances.

An agreement on the settlement of a dispute (conflict) by the parties in accordance with the procedure provided for in Chapter 17 of the CPC "Conciliation Procedures", concluded by the parties after the entry into force of the judicial act and approved by the court, which determines the rights and obligations of the parties in a disputed legal relationship that differ from those established by the judicial act, does not apply to newly discovered or new circumstances. The terms of such an agreement are subject to execution by the parties independently, and enforcement proceedings for the enforcement of the initial judicial act are subject to termination in accordance with subparagraphs 2) and 2-1) of paragraph 1 of Article 47 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated April 2, 2010 No. 261-IV "On Enforcement proceedings and the status of bailiffs".

The newly discovered circumstances, in relation to subparagraph 1) of the second part of Article 455 of the CPC, should be understood as the deliberate falsity of the testimony of a witness or expert opinion, the deliberate inaccuracy of translation, forgery of documents or material evidence, established by a court verdict that has entered into force, which resulted in the issuance of an illegal and unjustified judicial act, for the review of which an application has been submitted.

Civil case No. 7199-24-00-2a/1041 dated March 1, 2024

Judge of the Judicial Board for civil cases of the Astana City Court E.R.M., with the participation of a representative of A.A.E. – E.S.N., N. D.T., his representative S.J.J., a representative of the limited liability partnership "Royal Finance Group" - K.E.N., K. S.J., having considered in open court At the hearing, A.A.E.'s application for a review of the court's decision under new circumstances, received on A.A.E.'s private complaint. Based on the determination of the specialized interdistrict Economic Court of Astana dated January 23, 2024, it was established that the Decision of the specialized Interdistrict Economic Court of Astana dated May 29, 2020 denied the claim of A.A.E. to N.D.T., K.U.M., Royal Finance Group LLP, K.S.Zh., GUDepartment of Justice for the Almaty district of the Department of Justice of Nur-Sultan, NAO "Government for Citizens State Corporation" for the city of Nur-Sultan on the recognition of contracts and the re-registration of a legal entity as invalid.

By the ruling of the specialized interdistrict Economic Court of Astana dated July 23, 2020, A.A.E. was denied the restoration of the missed deadline.

By the ruling of the Judicial Board for Civil Cases of the Astana City Court dated October 6, 2020, this ruling was left unchanged.

On January 12, 2024, the plaintiff's side filed an application to the court in this case, according to which he requested to review and cancel the court's decision with reference to subparagraph 2) of part 2 of Article 455 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter referred to as the CPC) due to the fact that the Astana City Court's decision of September 29, 2023, cancelled the decision to terminate the criminal the case dated February 22, 2022, according to the statement of A.A.E. and in order to restore the violated rights, it is necessary to review the previously considered claim.

The ruling of the specialized interdistrict Economic Court of Astana dated January 23, 2024 denied the application.

In a private complaint, the applicant's representative asks to cancel the ruling and satisfy the application, citing a violation of the rules of procedural law.

After hearing the explanations of the applicant's representative, who supported the arguments of the private complaint, the objections of the defendants, having examined the materials of the civil case, and the statements, the board concludes that the ruling remains unchanged on the following grounds.

In accordance with Part 1 of Article 455 of the CPC, decisions, rulings and resolutions that have entered into force may be reviewed due to newly discovered or new circumstances.

According to the clarifications of paragraph 1 of the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated December 8, 2017 No. 12 "On the application by courts of the norms of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan when reviewing judicial acts based on newly discovered or new circumstances," courts should keep in mind that the first part of Article 455 of the CPC is not an independent basis for reviewing those that have entered into force. the force of judicial acts based on newly discovered or new circumstances. The grounds for revision are listed in parts two and three of Articles 455 of the CPC, they are exhaustive and are not subject to extensive interpretation.

According to subparagraph 2) of part 2 of Article 455 of the CPC, a criminal offense committed by a party, other persons participating in the case, or their representatives, or a criminal offense committed by judges during the consideration of the case is established by a verdict that has entered into force, a court decision, and decisions of state bodies and officials performing the functions of criminal prosecution.

Paragraph 6 of the Normative Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On the application by courts of the norms of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan when reviewing judicial acts on newly discovered or new circumstances" explains that in accordance with subparagraph 2) In the second part of Article 455 of the CPC, newly discovered circumstances should be understood as criminal acts of the persons involved in the case, their representatives, or judges committed during the consideration of this civil case (for example, a corruption offense) established by a court verdict that has entered into force., bribery or threat against a party, representatives, or witnesses). The circumstances listed in this paragraph and paragraph 5 of this regulatory resolution may be established, in addition to the verdict, by court decisions that have entered into force or by other state bodies and officials performing the functions of Amnesty's criminal prosecution, in connection with the death of the accused or the failure to reach the age for criminal prosecution.

Meanwhile, it follows from the contents of the application and the documents attached to the application that, in violation of these norms, the application does not specify the newly discovered circumstances or new circumstances provided for in Article 455 of the CPC.

The documents submitted to the court of appeal on the recognition of the notary as a suspect in the framework of the pre-trial investigation, the protocols of the interrogation of specialists and other documents were not indicated in the application as the basis for reviewing the decision, were not the subject of research by the court of first instance, therefore the board is not entitled to give a legal assessment of the submitted documents.

In these circumstances, the board does not see any grounds for revoking or changing the definition, and therefore the definition must be left unchanged, and the arguments of the private complaint are not satisfied.

Based on the above, guided by subparagraph 1) According to Part 6 of Article 429 of the CPC of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the board determined that the Ruling of the specialized Interdistrict Economic Court of Astana dated January 23, 2024, should remain unchanged, and the private complaint of A.E. Absaldikov should be dismissed. The ruling comes into legal force from the date of its announcement.

Rulings of the court of appeal issued on a private complaint or at the request of the prosecutor are not subject to appeal and protest, except for those blocking the possibility of further movement of the case, may be appealed and protested within six months from the date of its entry into force in the cassation instance of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

 Attention!  

       Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.  

 For more information,  please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085. 

Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office  Court Cases