PROBLEMS OF APPEALING DECISIONS, ACTIONS OR INACTION OF BODIES AND PERSONS ENFORCING COURT ORDERS IN CIVIL CASES

Abstract

The article deals with the problematic issues of appealing against decisions, actions or omissions of bodies and persons which enforce court rulings in civil cases. The author establishes that the right to appeal in the course of enforcement of court rulings in civil cases, as well as any other court rulings, directly follows from the content of the Constitution of Ukraine, since it is an integral element in the structure of the right to defence. The author establishes that the legislator defines two models of appealing against actions or omissions of bailiffs: administrative and judicial. A systematic analysis of the legislative provisions determines that there are three possible independent procedures for appealing against decisions, actions or omissions of bodies and persons engaged in enforcement of court rulings which exist within two models – administrative and judicial: within the judicial model – appeal under Articles 447-453 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine; within the administrative model: a) appeal against decisions, actions or omissions of state bailiffs in an administrative court under the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine as acts of public authorities; b) filing complaints to the direct management of the SES bodies where bailiffs enforcing court decisions work, as well as to the management of higher-level bodies in the SES system of Ukraine. Based on a systematic analysis of the provisions of civil procedure and enforcement legislation, the author concludes that there are certain problems of legal management of the procedure for appealing against decisions, actions or inactions of bailiffs in terms of the subject composition, terms of appeal, etc. The author proposes appropriate amendments to Parts 1-3 and Part 5 of Article 74 of the Law of Ukraine "On Enforcement Proceedings" aimed at achieving a clearer determination of the procedures for appealing against actions or omissions of bailiffs and a more complete exercise by the parties to enforcement proceedings of their rights and legitimate interests.