EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS JUDGEMENT AS A BASIS FOR REVIEW OF THE NATIONAL COURTS' JUDGEMENT

УДК 347.9

The purpose of the article – a critical analysis of the position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the justification, through the analysis of the ECtHR practice and scientific work on execution of the ECtHR judgments, about the coordination of positions of national courts and the supranational body.
The methodological basis for the study: general scientific methods (analysis, synthesis, comparison); private and academic (interpretation, comparative legal, formal-legal).
Problems and basic scientific results:
The issue of implementation of the Human Rights Court decisions at the national level oc-curs when the compensation is not enough to eliminate the revealed violations. Russian legislator opted for the situation of Human Rights by the European Court finding a violation of the provisions of the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in the consideration by the court of a particular case, in connection with the decision by which the applicant applied to the ECtHR mechanism for review of the decision on the new circumstances. Supreme Court puts forward three conditions for the implementation of the revi-sion of the judicial act on a national level, which should be available at the same time: 1) the continuous nature of the adverse effects; 2) the existence of violations of the Convention or gross procedural violations; 3) a causal link between the breach and the consequences.

The author point out that the regulation of possible conflicts between the Convention and national legislation is based on cooperation (not confrontation) States and the European Court of Human Rights. Such practice of cooperation based on the principles of subsidiarity (addition to national rights protection system); evolutionary interpretation of the Convention (which implies flexibility, and accounting for changes in public relations); Judges dialogue and to develop advisory opinions. Consequently, the task of the Constitutional Court can not be default search options, on the contrary, its task – to determine exactly how, taking into account the differences in the legislation, the decision will be enforced. Failure, as well as the improper execution of judgments of the ECtHR may involve the establishment of a new violation of the provisions of the Convention and sanctions against violators.

1. Kochurina T.A. Institution of re-consideration of judicial decrees on newly discovered or new circumstances: civil procedural and international law interaction. Rossiskiy yuridicheskiy zhurnal = Russian Juridical Journal, 2011, no. 3, pp. 207–210. (in Russ.).

2. Terekhova L.A. System of review of judicial acts in the mechanism of judicial protection. Moscow, Wolters Kluwer Publ., 2007. 320 p. (in Russ.).

3. Terekhova L.A. Supervisory review procedure in civil proceedings: problems of development and improve-ment. Moscow, Wolters Kluwer Publ., 2009. 184 p. (in Russ.).

4. Akhmedov S.M. Manufacture on revision of judicial acts on again opened circumstances in system of revision of judicial acts in the arbitral process, Cand. Diss. Thesis. Moscow, 2008. 27 p. (in Russ.).

5. Blazheev V.V. Revision of judicial decisions on again opened circumstances in the mechanism of judicial protection of rights and legitimate interests of citizens and organizations. Zakony Rossii: opit, analiz, praktika, 2008, no. 11, pp. 61–72. (in Russ.).

6. Zhilin G.A. To the question about the legal nature of the revision of judicial decisions on again opened or new circumstances. Zakon, 2014, no. 7, pp. 104–114. (in Russ.).

7. de Salvia M. Precedents of the European Court of Human Rights. St. Petersburg, 2004. 1071 p. (in Russ.).

8. Anishina V.I. Problems of application of Russian court decisions of the European Court of human rights. Mezhdunarodnoe publichnoe i chastnoe pravo, 2008, no. 2, pp. 14–17. (in Russ.).

9. Kuzheleva M.Yu. Decisions of the European Court of human rights in the constitutional law of the Russian Federation. Pravoprimenenie v sovremennoi Rossii. Omsk, 2015, pp. 57–59. (in Russ.).

10. Filatov M.A. On the procedural mechanisms of the execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. Vestnik VAS RF, 2013, no. 9, pp. 41–51. (in Russ.).

11. Maxeiner J. Legal certainty: a European alternative to American Legal Indeterminacy? Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law, 2007, no. 15, pp. 541–608.

12. Bower G.S. The Doctrine of Res Judicata. London, Butterworth & Co. Publ., 1924. 292 p.

13. Moschzisker R. Res Judicata. The Yale Law Journal, 1929, Vol. 38, no. 3.

14. Terekhov V.V. The boundaries of the legal force of judicial decisions: territorial and temporal aspects, Cand. Diss. Omsk, 2014. 228 p. (in Russ.).

15. Terekhov V.V. The legal force of judicial decisions: spatial and temporal limits. Moscow, Yurlitinform Publ., 2015. 224 p. (in Russ.).

16. Petrova I.A. The review of judicial acts on again opened circumstances in civil and arbitration proceedings: a comparative legal aspect, Cand. Diss. Moscow, 2010. 186 p. (in Russ.).

17. Sakhnova T.V. Course of civil process. Moscow, Statut Publ., 2014. 784 p. (in Russ.).

18. Kuznetsov E.N. To the question of enforceability in Russia of decisions of the European Court of human rights. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa = Herald of Civil Procedure, 2016, no. 4, pp. 235–243. (in Russ.).

19. Terekhova L.A. Application of European Court of Human Rights rullings in the jurisprudence of Russian courts. Vestnik Omskogo universiteta. Seriya “Pravo” = Herald of Omsk University. Series “Law”, 2016, no. 2 (47), pp. 138–146. (in Russ.).

20. Kovler A.I. European Convention, and Ratio of national constitutional law – the aggravation of the problems (cause and effect). Rossiyskiy ezhegodnik Konventsii po pravam cheloveka, 2015, no. 1, pp. 19–64. (in Russ.).

21. Sultanov A.R. The struggle for legal certainty and the search for justice. Moscow, Statut Publ., 2015. 688 p. (in Russ.).

22. Sultanov A.R. The continuation of the case “Markin v. Russia”. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa = Herald of Civil Procedure, 2013, no. 5, pp. 260–285. (in Russ.).