Ивакин В.Н. Специальные полномочия адвоката – представителя в гражданском и арбитражном судопроизводстве

Аннотация: The litigant’s representative in civil and arbitration proсess actions within the limits of powers which was assignment to him. In this connection the question about them volume is of great practical importance and needs careful studi. In the article points the extension of the volume of the special powers of the representatives on a contractual basis the advocates included in the CPC RF of 2002 year. The appointing in the CPC of the powers on the dispose actions in the executive proceedings that regulate the separate federal law recognized as inexpedient. Are groundless also the offers to the addition of the list of the special powers with the new powers. At the same time exsists the necessity some to broad such powers as in the CPC as in the APC RF of 2002 year. Was criticized the excessive increase of the quantity of the special powers of the representatives in the APC which leads as soon as to the complication of the legalization of the powers of the representatives including advocates and can to break the interests of the principals. The autor notes as the lack of the notarial practice the automatic legalization of the powers of attorneys in all cases with the indication in them of the whole of dispose actions without explanation of the consequences of these actions. But the question whether he entrusts to the representative the accomplishment of the actions which influences of the clame’s fate and the execution of the judgement must decide himself the principal. In order to avoid the disputes will better to indicate specifically in the power of attorney the dispose powers. Unacceptable is the offer to complicate the order of the access in the trial and the leave out of it by means of pronouncement of the decision that enters in the record of proceedings. The need to include in the law the rule according to it the principal can to empower one’s representative to accomplish of the separate processing actions is absent too. Mistaken seems the opinion that needs to allow to the principal to approve of the following accomplish of the dispose actions with the litigant’s representative if he even hadn’t the legalized according powers originally. In conclusion were analysed the explanations of the Supreme Court of the RF concerning powers of the advocates which take part in the trial as the litigant’s representatives by appointment.

Ключевые слова:

Abstract: The litigant’s representative in civil and arbitration proсess actions within the limits of powers which was assignment to him. In this connection the question about them volume is of great practical importance and needs careful studi. In the article points the extension of the volume of the special powers of the representatives on a contractual basis the advocates included in the CPC RF of 2002 year. The appointing in the CPC of the powers on the dispose actions in the executive proceedings that regulate the separate federal law recognized as inexpedient. Are groundless also the offers to the addition of the list of the special powers with the new powers. At the same time exsists the necessity some to broad such powers as in the CPC as in the APC RF of 2002 year. Was criticized the excessive increase of the quantity of the special powers of the representatives in the APC which leads as soon as to the complication of the legalization of the powers of the representatives including advocates and can to break the interests of the principals. The autor notes as the lack of the notarial practice the automatic legalization of the powers of attorneys in all cases with the indication in them of the whole of dispose actions without explanation of the consequences of these actions. But the question whether he entrusts to the representative the accomplishment of the actions which influences of the clame’s fate and the execution of the judgement must decide himself the principal. In order to avoid the disputes will better to indicate specifically in the power of attorney the dispose powers. Unacceptable is the offer to complicate the order of the access in the trial and the leave out of it by means of pronouncement of the decision that enters in the record of proceedings. The need to include in the law the rule according to it the principal can to empower one’s representative to accomplish of the separate processing actions is absent too. Mistaken seems the opinion that needs to allow to the principal to approve of the following accomplish of the dispose actions with the litigant’s representative if he even hadn’t the legalized according powers originally. In conclusion were analysed the explanations of the Supreme Court of the RF concerning powers of the advocates which take part in the trial as the litigant’s representatives by appointment.

Keywords: