Where to file a claim, or Jurisdiction of civil cases

The successful commencement of consideration of a civil case depends to a large extent on whether the plaintiff correctly determines the instance in which the statement of claim should be sent. And, therefore, it is worth to find out what is the jurisdiction of civil cases, what kinds of it are distinguished and what is the meaning of each.

The notion of jurisdiction of civil cases

The correct composition of the statement of claim depends in many respects on whether the instance to which it was sent is correctly chosen. In fact, this issue and manages the jurisdiction of civil cases.

The subject of the claim determines the legal relationship in connection with which the dispute arose. On its basis, subordination is deduced, i. Which type of court should consider a controversial attitude (for example, to an arbitral or a court of general jurisdiction). But at the same time, the subject of the claim also determines where the case will be examined. In this respect, the geographical position and status of the court are recorded.

In connection with the above, the jurisdiction of civil cases is a set of legal provisions on the possibility of attributing a certain contentious relationship to the competence of a particular court.

It is worth noting that this category is ambiguous and is divided into species that can not be ignored when drafting an appeal to the court.

Tribal jurisdiction in the civil procedure

Any disputed relationship is subject to clear classification by legislation on the basis of complexity. That is why lawyers fixed such concept as "patrimonial jurisdiction in the civil process".

The defining moment in this type of jurisdiction is the subject of the claim, or that relation concerning which the dispute arose. As you know, the judicial system can be represented by a special "ladder", which includes the courts of first instance, appellate and cassation. Tribal jurisdiction determines, based on the subject of the dispute, which structure will consider the claim in the first instance. These provisions are regulated by 24-27 st.st. CCP RF.

Territorial jurisdiction of civil cases

A contentious relationship arises between persons whose whereabouts do not necessarily coincide. Therefore, the practice and theory of civil process highlights a special kind of jurisdiction - territorial. In fact, it is a set of rules by which it is determined where (on what territory) it is necessary to send your claim for violated rights.

The territorial jurisdiction of civil cases, in turn, branched into five types. The first and the main is the general jurisdiction, which determines that the judicial claims can be sent to the instance at the place of residence or the location of the respondent party. This provision is governed by the provisions of 28 Art. CCP RF.

However, this rule is not mandatory. And, hence, it is necessary to specify the second subtype of jurisdiction - alternative. Its regulation is fixed in Article 29 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation. The essence of it is to provide a choice to the plaintiff, in which court to appeal.

In contrast, the legislator has established the exclusive jurisdiction of civil cases (Article 30 of the CCP RF). In this case, the legislation strictly fixes the list of cases falling under this type.

Also, the parties are singled out (in accordance with Article 32 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the parties themselves determine the court instance in the contract) and jurisdiction over communication of cases (Article 31 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation). The latter is based on the principle of the first case. It means that the acceding claims are considered in the court in which the first civil case was initiated.

It would seem that the proposed classifications bear a purely theoretical meaning. This is not true. The correct definition of territorial and tribal jurisdiction affects not only the prompt initiation and consideration of the case. The practical significance lies in the fact that incorrectly defined jurisdiction may become an occasion for challenging a court decision and, as a consequence, delaying the process of resolving a disputable relationship.