The Code of Civil Procedure of the Republic of Belarus: Appealing Against Court Decisions on Appeal

In this article, we will analyze how the rules for appealing court decisions in an appeal under the Code of Civil Procedure (CCG) work, as well as compare them with the norms of the Commercial Procedure Code (EPC) and the Civil Procedure Code (CPC). Let’s show the key differences, what is important to pay attention to.

Key changes and conclusions

• The SCC has unified the rules of appeal with the Civil Procedure Code and the Code of Commercial Procedure, eliminating the differences between civil and commercial proceedings.
• The possibility of appealing against decisions and rulings of the Supreme Court made in the first instance has been introduced, which was previously impossible under the Civil Procedure Code.
• The SCC provides an opportunity to correct deficiencies in the appeal without the need to re-submit documents, unlike the EPC.
• Appeals can be submitted in writing or electronically, which increases the convenience for the parties.
• Approaches to the deadlines for filing a complaint have been changed: now they depend on the date of receipt of the reasoning part of the decision, which corresponds to the Civil Procedure Code, but differs from the EPC.

Right to appeal

1. An important innovation of the SCC is the possibility of appealing against decisions of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus issued as a court of first instance. Decisions of the court of first instance that have not entered into legal force, including decisions of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus made in the first instance, except for cases when, in accordance with the SCC and other legislative acts, such a decision enters into force immediately after its proclamation (paragraphs 1, 4 of Article 555 of the SCC).
   In turn, at present, paragraph 4 of Article 399 of the Civil Procedure Code directly establishes that the decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus is not subject to appeal or protest.
2. Rulings of the court of first instance that have not entered into legal force in the cases and in the manner provided for by the SCC, including a ruling of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus issued in the first instance that has not entered into legal force, with the exception of certain rulings of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus (for example, on issues related to legal costs, on suspension of proceedings in the case, on refusal to resume proceedings in the case, etc.).

Terms of appeal (protest)

The SCC adopted the approaches to the terms of appeal from the Civil Procedure Code. Thus, in accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 559 of the Civil Code, an appeal and (or) an appeal protest against a court decision shall be filed and (or) filed within fifteen days after the decision has been made or served on the person entitled to appeal and (or) protest, at the request of such person of the reasoning part of the decision.

Courts Considering Appeals, Protests

In accordance with Article 27 of the Civil Procedure Code, the legality and validity of decisions and rulings of the courts of first instance that have not yet entered into legal force are checked on appeal by the judicial chambers for civil cases of regional and Minsk City courts, the judicial chamber for civil cases of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus. In such cases, the said courts sit with three judges, one of whom presides over the consideration of the case.

In accordance with Article 269 of the Code of Commercial Procedure, appeals (protests) are considered by the appellate instance of the economic court of the region (the city of Minsk) in the number of at least three judges of the court considering economic cases.

The SCC retained the approaches provided for by the Civil Procedure Code and the Code of Commercial Procedure and delineated the competence of the courts of appeal for economic courts and courts of general jurisdiction.  Thus, in accordance with Article 557 of the Civil Code of Procedure, appeals and (or) appeals against decisions of the court of first instance that have not yet entered into legal force are considered:

• decisions of district (city) courts – by the judicial chamber for civil cases of the relevant regional (Minsk City) court in a collegial composition of three judges;
• decisions of regional (Minsk City) courts – by the Judicial Chamber for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus in a collegial composition of three judges;
• against decisions of the economic court of the region (the city of Minsk) – by the judicial panel of the Economic Court of Appeal consisting of three judges;
• decisions of the Economic Court of Appeal – by the Judicial Chamber for Economic Cases of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus consisting of three judges;
• decisions of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus adopted in the first instance – by the appellate instance of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus.

Form and Content of Appeal and (or) Appeal Protest

In accordance with Part 1 of Article 561 of the Civil Procedure Code, an appeal is submitted to the court in writing or in the form of an electronic document and is signed by the person filing the complaint or his representative authorized to sign it. According to paragraph 8 of the same article, the appeal and the written materials attached thereto shall be filed and/or brought to the court of first instance with copies in the number of copies according to the number of persons participating in the case.

Grounds for leaving the appeal without action

In accordance with Article 562 of the Civil Code, the appeal will be dismissed if:

• when filing an appeal, the requirements for procedural documents are not met;
• there is no indication of the decision that is being appealed or protested, the limits of its appeal (protest) and the name of the court that made the decision;
• there is no justification of the incorrectness of the consideration of the case, the illegality and unreasonableness of the decision, with reference to legislative acts, circumstances of the case and evidence;
• there is no indication of the disputed amount of property claims;
• there is no request from the person filing the appeal or the prosecutor filing the appeal as to whether the decision is being appealed or protested in whole or in part, and what changes are required to be made to it;
• a power of attorney or other document certifying the authority of the representative, executed in accordance with the established procedure, is not attached;
• copies of the appeal and attached written materials are not attached in the number of copies according to the number of persons participating in the case;
• a document confirming the payment of the state duty is not attached.

Joining an appeal

The SCC adopted the rules governing the procedure for joining an appeal from the CPC (Article 410 of the CPC is similar to Article 565 of the CPC).

Thus, in accordance with paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 565 of the Civil Code, co-plaintiffs, co-defendants and third parties acting in the proceedings on the side of the person who filed the appeal have the right to file an application to join the appeal if their requirements coincide. An application to join an appeal may be filed only with the court of first instance within the period of appeal (protest). No state fee is paid for the consideration of such an application.

Subject and Limits of Consideration of the Case by the Court of Appeal

The SCC has unified approaches to determining the subject and limits of consideration of a case by the court of appeal.

When considering a case on an appeal, the court of appeal verifies the correctness of the establishment by the court of first instance of the factual circumstances of the case, the application of the norms of substantive and procedural law on the basis of the evidence available in the case and additionally submitted. The court of appeal shall consider the case within the framework of the arguments and requirements set forth in the appeal and/or the appeal protest, the responses thereto, and shall verify the legality and validity of the decision only in the appealed (protested) part.

Thus, the SCC rejected the norms provided for by the EPC regarding the re-examination of the case by the court of appeal, limiting the consideration of the case to the arguments and requirements set forth in the appeal.  At the same time, if during the review of the decision of the court of first instance in the appealed part it is established that the court has violated or incorrectly applied the norms of substantive and (or) procedural law, the court of appeal has the right to verify such decision in full (paragraph 4 of Article 575 of the Civil Procedure Code).

REVERA’s comment

The institute of review of court rulings on appeal, introduced by the SCC, has largely adopted the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, unifying them with the norms of the Code of Commercial Procedure. This innovation is aimed at creating a more balanced approach to the rights of parties in civil and commercial cases.

One of the notable differences between the CPC, EPC and SCC is the approach to the deadlines for filing an appeal. Unlike the Civil Procedure Code and the Civil Procedure Code, the EPC does not link them with the moment of receipt of the reasoning part of the court decision. This creates certain risks for participants in business processes, who may not have time to exercise their right to appeal.

It is also worth noting that the Code of Commercial Procedure obliges to attach to the appeal documents confirming their sending to other parties to the case, while the Civil Procedure Code and the Civil Procedure Code exempt the parties from this formality, entrusting the sending of such documents to the court. This simplification of the process is in line with the logic of ensuring equality and accessibility of justice.

The SCC introduces a mechanism for leaving an appeal without action in the presence of violations, which is absent in the EPC. In the economic process, non-compliance with formal requirements, for example, non-payment of the state duty, leads to the return of the complaint or its dismissal. This, in turn, requires the restoration of missed deadlines, creating additional difficulties. The CSC innovation solves this problem by giving the parties the opportunity to eliminate deficiencies without having to start the procedure again. In addition, unlike the EPC, the SCC regulates the procedure for joining the appeal, which ensures a more complete involvement of the participants in the process.

In general, the approach of the SCC to the regulation of appellate review of court decisions can be considered progressive. It eliminates inequality between participants in civil and economic processes, unifies rules and introduces mechanisms aimed at simplifying the procedure and protecting the rights of the parties. These changes not only make the judicial system more flexible, but also bring it closer to modern standards of fairness and efficiency.

Authors: Alina Marchik, Alexey Fedorovich

Dear journalists, use of material from the REVERA website in publications is only possible with our written permission. 

To approve material, please contact i.antonova@revera.legal or Telegram: https://t.me/PR_revera