Art. 150 agrarian and industrial complex of the Russian Federation. Grounds for termination of proceedings in the case

In Art. определены основания прекращения производства по делу. 150 APK RF (in the new edition) determined the grounds for the termination of proceedings in the case. Analysis of the materials shows that this norm is used by instances authorized to deal with economic disputes, quite often. Meanwhile, there are a number of nuances that are subject to detailed consideration, since they cause certain difficulties in practice.

Common grounds

They are installed in part 1 of Art. . 150 agrarian and industrial complex of the Russian Federation . The arbitration shall terminate the proceedings upon the occurrence of the following circumstances:

1. The case can not be considered in this instance.
2. There is a judicial act issued following the results of proceedings between the same subjects on the same subject matter by arbitration, a body of general jurisdiction or a competent structure of a foreign state and entered into force. Exception is made when the execution of the decision of a foreign authority was refused.
3. There is a decision of the arbitration court, adopted on the same subject, the conflict between the same parties and for the same reasons. The exception is situations where arbitration has been denied extradition of IL for enforcement or the decision has been canceled.
4. The plaintiff refused the demands, and this refusal was accepted by the court.
5. Yurlitso, who acted in the case as one of the parties, was liquidated.
6. The citizen who was a party to the dispute died, and the law does not allow for the succession in this case.
7. There are grounds defined in Article 194 (Part 7) of the Code.

In part 2 of Art. установлено, что производство по делу прекращается при утверждении мирового соглашения. 150 APC RF established that the proceedings on the case terminated upon the approval of the settlement agreement. The legislation may provide for other circumstances.

Art. 150 agrarian and industrial complex of the Russian Federation with comments

The case may not be subject to review by the authorities for a number of reasons. In particular, 1 tbsp. применяется в том случае, если спор неподведомственен данному органу. 150 APC of the Russian Federation is applied in the event that the dispute is not under jurisdiction of this body. For example, a proceeding on recognizing a government order not in accordance with constitutional provisions should be terminated, as it is in the competence of the COP. The dispute over the recognition of a lease agreement for agricultural land is invalid in fact is a territorial conflict between the two regions that arose in connection with the adoption of acts on changing borders. This case is decided in accordance with Art. 67 (part 3), sub. "A", part one of Art. 102 of the Constitution.

Exceptions

Production does not cease, and the authority accepts the application in the case with the participation of a foreign entity if the provisions of subordination are provided for in an international treaty that has priority to domestic legislation. In particular, the art. была применена к спору, в основе которого лежали отношения, связанные с международной перевозкой грузов. 150 APK RF (with the latest amendments) was applied to the dispute, which was based on the relationship associated with the international carriage of goods. As a consequence, they were subject to the Geneva Convention of 19.05.1956.

Right to appeal

Within the framework of Art. показывает, что решение о прекращении производства принимается зачастую после выяснения наличия у заявителя юридической возможности подать иск, а у ответчика – соответствующего иммунитета. 150 of the Code of Arbitration Practice of the Russian Federation, judicial practice shows that the decision to terminate proceedings is often taken after finding out whether the applicant has a legal opportunity to file a claim, and the defendant has appropriate immunity. The following cases are classified as such. According to the provisions of Article 52 of the Code, the prosecutor of the region or his deputy sends the appeal to arbitration. Equivalent officials have the same right. At the same time, the district prosecutor and his deputy appeal can not be sent to arbitration connected with challenging the decision of the management body to bring the legal entity to administrative liability. Accordingly, the proceedings for such an application must be terminated.

Tax disputes

In connection with the definition, present in Art. 11 of the Tax Code, the definition of a foreign organization simultaneously covers both the legal entity itself and its units established in the territory of Russia, the latter are recognized as taxpayers. On them, according to Art. 19 of the Tax Code, may be charged with the obligation to pay the relevant amounts to the budget, as well as responsibility for the committed offenses in cases specified in Ch. 16. As taxpayers, these entities, in accordance with Art. 137 of the Tax Code, have the right to appeal decisions of supervisory bodies of non-normative nature, inaction / actions of employees if, in their opinion, they violated their interests. Accordingly, the proceedings for such cases can not be terminated by virtue of Art. . 150 agrarian and industrial complex of the Russian Federation . In turn, the tax inspectorate can file a claim against the buyer and the seller demanding that the agreement concluded between them be invalidated and that the revenue received as a result of illegal compensation from the budget of the tax amounts paid be paid to the state in return. In this case also art. применяться не может. 150 APC RF can not be applied.

Subject matter of the dispute

Legal assessment of inaction / actions of a person may be carried out in the proceedings, together with other circumstances essential for its resolution, but not independently. In particular, if an individual entrepreneur goes to court with a claim to recognize him as a bona fide drawer in accordance with the rules for establishing a fact of legal significance, the production will be terminated in accordance with the rule in question.

Challenging acts

It is not allowed to apply the article in the case on recognizing a legal document as inoperative only on the basis of the fact of its loss of power. Termination of production under Art. осуществляется в данном случае только после установления, что оспариваемый акт, отмененный или с истекшим сроком действия, не нарушил законных интересов и прав заявителя. 150 AIC of the Russian Federation is implemented in this case only after the establishment that the impugned act, canceled or expired, did not violate the legitimate interests and rights of the applicant. Even if the normative act to be published was not published, but was regarded by the stakeholders as valid, generated legal consequences and was appealed, the application for invalidation should be examined on the merits. The conclusion of the court must be present in the operative part of the judgment. The claimed requirements should be considered irrespective of the end of the period of the non-normative act, the fact that the officials committed the procedures aimed at satisfying the claims of the plaintiff. If, during the proceedings concerning the recognition of such a document as invalid, it will be established that it is normative, the proceedings are terminated in accordance with Art. , если его обжалование не предусматривается федеральным законодательством. 150 AIC of the Russian Federation , if its appeal is not provided for by federal legislation. The definition should indicate the reasons for which the authority has reached the relevant conclusions.

Identity of claims

P. 2 tbsp. устанавливает возможность прекращения производства исключительно в тех случаях, когда право на защиту было ранее реализовано в состоявшемся процессе в соответствии с принципами равноправия и состязательности участников. 150 AIC RF establishes the possibility of termination of production only in cases where the right to protection was previously realized in the process in accordance with the principles of equality and competitiveness of participants. This provision is aimed at suppressing proceedings on identical claims. It can not be regarded as violating freedom and human rights.

An Important Moment

Art. 150, 151 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of the Russian Federation providing for grounds and rules for termination of proceedings with the participation of the same entities, with reference to the existence of a definition of a general jurisdiction to complete the proceedings in connection with the refusal of the claimant from the claimed claims, can not be considered to contradict the norms 118, 47 and 46 of the Constitution. This is due to the fact that the person's right is based on the principle of disposability. And he, in turn, refers to the fundamental foundations of civil proceedings. Accordingly, the provisions in which this right is fixed, in particular, ordering the termination of the proceedings, if the claimant has refused the claims, can not be regarded as violating the constitutional freedoms and the applicant's interests described in the complaint. Here it is necessary to note the following point. The court does not have the right not to accept the refusal of the claim, referring only to the fact that it violates the right of the owner of the disputed material assets - the subject of the Russian Federation, and is obliged to stop the proceedings on the grounds set forth in Section Fourth Art. 150 agroindustrial complex. If the consideration is appointed in a simplified procedure and after that the plaintiff has filed a corresponding petition, it is studied, in accordance with the provisions of Art. 227 taking into account art. 49 (part 5). Partial refusal does not entail discontinuing the proceedings throughout the entire case.

Liquidation of an organization

This procedure acts as one more reason for the termination of production. This provision also can not be regarded as violating the interests and rights of persons, since in the absence of one of the participants it is impossible to decide on his duties and legal possibilities. Liquidation of the organization is confirmed by an extract from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities. The termination of the proceedings in this case does not entail the transfer of duties and rights in the order of succession. In this connection, supervisory proceedings are also to be completed . At the same time, according to the practice of the Supreme Arbitration Court, the recognition of a decision to register a person as invalid does not in itself indicate a termination of legal capacity. It does not serve as a basis for considering transactions made before this point, as insignificant. Accordingly, this does not entail termination of the proceedings under Art. 150 agroindustrial complex.

Explanations

When one of the participants in the case is liquidated, for example, if the cession agreement is declared invalid, the production must be terminated completely. This is due to the fact that this procedure involves the completion of the activities of the organization without the transfer of duties and rights to other persons under the rules of succession. Liquidation of a municipal body acting as a defendant shall entail termination of the case under clause 5 of the rule in question. In this case, a rule similar to the one above applies.

If the foreign company, being a party to the case, the proceedings under which was carried out by the arbitral tribunal, was temporarily excluded from the register, and its founders did not notify the court, the authority considering the dispute on the cancellation of the decision of the said authority must take these circumstances into account.

The liquidation of one of the parties to the agreement on the joint construction of a residential building is not an obstacle to the resolution of the merits on the merits of a shareholder-IP on recognizing the nullity of individual paragraphs of the document, which were amended in this agreement. One condition must be satisfied. In accordance with the agreement on joint activities, the company, subsequently liquidated, must be transferred all the rights and functions of the customer-developer to another person. It should be noted that the right of claim, which the equity holder has, corresponds to the obligation of the developer-customer. It is entrusted with the organization of the construction of the structure, the disposal of the funds allocated for the financing of capital investments, with material means that are taken to the balance. In this case, the cessation of production will create obstacles to securing the protection of legitimate interests and the rights of the equity investor.

Death of a citizen

In case of the death of an entrepreneur acting as a party to the proceedings, the law provides for succession. However, for its implementation, the subject of the dispute should not concern personal rights. In accordance with the Civil Code, as well as other norms, their transfer to other persons is not allowed. Among these rights, among other things, is the legal opportunity to conduct business. If the subject of the dispute concerns the personal rights of a citizen, the proceedings shall be terminated in accordance with paragraph 6 of the rule in question.

Additionally

The termination of the case at the stage of preparation, in the preliminary meeting, if an amicable settlement is the basis, is not allowed. When an agreement is reached, it is approved within the framework of the hearing. In this case, the rules of Article 141 of the Code must be observed. Only after that the proceedings are terminated in accordance with Part 2 of Art. 150 agrarian and industrial complex of the Russian Federation. In this case, it is necessary to take into account one nuance. The termination of proceedings in connection with the approval of an amicable agreement will be considered unlawful if there are doubts as to the authority of the entity that signed it.