Civil Procedure Code: review of judicial decisions based on newly discovered circumstances
In this article, REVERA lawyers analyze how the rules for reviewing judicial decisions based on newly discovered circumstances function under the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) of the Republic of Belarus. The analysis includes a comparison with the provisions of the Economic Procedure Code (EPC) and the Civil Procedure Code (CivPC).
The grounds for reviewing judicial decisions on newly discovered circumstances are outlined in Article 630 of the CPC and remain largely unchanged compared to the CivPC and EPC.
The grounds include:
- Facts essential to the case that were unknown and could not have been known to the applicant and the court;
- False witness testimony, expert conclusions, specialist opinions, mistranslations, forged documents or physical evidence established by a final court judgment, which led to an unlawful or unfounded judicial decision;
- Criminal acts by parties to the case, their representatives, or judges, as confirmed by a final criminal verdict, which resulted in an unlawful or unfounded judicial decision;
- Annulment of a judicial ruling or decision of another state body that served as the basis for the challenged decision;
- A final court decision declaring a transaction invalid, which led to an unlawful or unfounded ruling;
- A ruling by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Belarus finding a legal norm (or its provisions) applied in the case to be unconstitutional, if such recognition entails a revision of judicial decisions.
Compared to the CivPC, a new ground introduced in the CPC is the recognition of a transaction as invalid by a final court decision, which led to an unlawful or unfounded ruling (already present in EPC, Article 319(2)(6)).
Courts handling review cases
The CPC retains the approach from the CivPC. A case is reviewed by the court that issued the original decision. If the decision was changed or a new one was issued by an appellate, cassation, or supervisory court, the reviewing court is the one that made the changes.
Who may apply for review
The CPC adopts the same approach as the CivPC. Applications may be submitted by parties to the case. Petitions for review may be filed by officials authorized to lodge cassation or supervisory protests to the court that issued the decision (Article 632(1) CPC).
Application deadline
The CPC sets a 3-month deadline from the date the new circumstances became known (Article 632(2) CPC). It explicitly allows courts to restore a missed deadline for valid reasons (Article 119 CPC).
While the CivPC and EPC also set a 3-month deadline, they do not expressly allow restoration for missed deadlines in this context — only in general terms. The CPC provides more clarity and structure regarding deadline restoration.
Timeframe for consideration
Applications must be reviewed in a court hearing within one month of submission (Article 634(1) CPC). The EPC uses a similar one-month standard (Article 323(1) EPC). The CivPC does not specify a timeframe but refers to general first-instance case procedures, implying a two-month limit (Article 456(3) CivPC).
The CPC’s clarity on this matter simplifies the understanding and application of procedural rules.
Court decision outcomes
According to Article 635(1) of the CPC, upon reviewing the application or petition, the court may:
- Satisfy the application or petition and annul the judicial decision;
- Refuse to review the decision.
A refusal to review may be appealed. However, a court ruling that satisfies the application or petition is not subject to appeal or protest (Article 635(2) CPC), consistent with the CivPC (Article 457(2)).
The EPC allows appeals of refusals to review, and also of decisions that annul prior rulings and resume proceedings (Article 324(2) EPC).
REVERA’s commentary
The CPC’s provisions on reviewing judicial decisions based on newly discovered circumstances are largely identical to those in the CivPC and EPC. The grounds, application process, eligible parties, and potential court outcomes are generally aligned. The CPC follows the CivPC model but introduces clearer procedural guidelines and borrows select elements from the EPC, making it more detailed and practical.
Authors: Alina Marchik, Aleksei Fedorovich
Contact our lawyer to learn more
Написать юристуDear journalists, use of materials from the REVERA website in publications is only permitted with prior written consent.
For permission inquiries, please contact us at: i.antonova@revera.legal or via Telegram: https://t.me/PR_revera
