Clarification of the court decision: nuances and subtleties

The need for interpreting the judge's thoughts on paper arises when they reveal elements of ambiguity, contradictions or fuzziness. Often, the lack of certainty is hidden in the resolution of the document, which entails a shortage of specific measures to implement it.

To shed light on the intricacies of the thoughts of officials is a method that eliminates the shortcomings of a judicial decision. At times, a vague exposition of the circumstances that the court has established and giving grounds for conclusions requires clarification of the motives for formulations. Practice shows that this usually happens with the actual justification of the reasoning part of the document.

It should be borne in mind that an explanation of a court decision can not aim to change it (even partially) or raise issues that have not been involved in the proceedings. That is, the state official should only present the previous document in a more complete and clear form.

The right to clarify the decision of the court belongs to the body that issued it. He can comment on the text both at the request of the persons who took part in the case, and at the request of the bailiff. The latter is given the right to raise such an issue on the basis of Article 32 of the RF Law "On Enforcement Proceedings" of 22 October 2007 No. 229-FZ.

In the event that the court of first instance changes or makes a different decision, the clarification shall be made by the body that put the final point in the case. If it is impossible to attract an official to clarify the decision of the court that issued it, this job is performed by another official at the same level.

There are some conditions on which it is possible to initiate the process of clarification: the first - the verdict should not be implemented, and the second - the period of compulsory execution has not expired. Execution of court decisions makes their interpretation impossible. Partial implementation of the prescription implies clarification of the unexecuted items, but subject to the existence of a deadline for implementation.
The application for clarification of the court decision, filed after its implementation or after the expiration of the term, and which has not been restored, experts do not consider.

Lighting a document that does not Is subject to enforcement, can not be limited by any period. Applications of individuals and legal entities regarding the requirement to implement competent comments on verdicts are considered based on general rules in civil proceedings in the manner of an open trial with notification of the participants. The failure of the persons notified of the forthcoming clarification of the decision can not be considered grounds for deposition.

The explanation is formalized as an official definition of the court as an independent procedural document. It is filed in the catalog with the case and is considered an integral part of the solution. The court's decision that arose as a result of the explanation can be appealed to a higher authority either alone or together with a decision on the general rules of the Civil Procedure Code.