Filing a lawsuit under Russian procedural law in the e-justice era
https://doi.org/10.38044/2686-9136-2024-5-7
Abstract
The study sets out to evaluate the existing electronic filing of lawsuit services in civil litigation in Russia as an additional opportunity to access justice and implement the right to be heard. The author identifies the reasons for continuing to use the court system by mail or in person. Because ordinary people and lawyers are cautious about new technology, a lawsuit filed online might not be taken seriously. Additionally, the guarantees provided by law aim to preserve the date of the initial court appeal in cases where proceedings cannot be initiated due to noncompliance with the required formalities for the statement of claim. Based on the functionally equivalent method developed by UNCITRAL, the right to access justice has been shown to be unjustifiably violated by the procedure of technical verification of claim submitted to the court, which empowers a court official to notify the plaintiff that the documents cannot be recognized as received. The study evaluates the statements in current legal literature regarding the use of artificial intelligence by existing court filing services, as well as plans to develop a cassation appeal service using predicative justice technologies in terms of their impact on access to justice and the right to be heard. It is proposed that ethical rules be developed on the use of artificial intelligence in communication between the plaintiff and the court at the stage of applying to the court. Such an approach should allow to evaluate the administration of justice as posing the greatest risks to human rights in general and procedural rights in particular. The right of a lawyer to access judicial practice and tools for its analysis should be considered as part of the right to be heard.
About the Author
I. N. Lukianova
Russian Foreign Trade Academy
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Irina N. Lukianova — Ph.D. in Law, Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Procedural Law
6-A, Vorobiyovskoye Highway, Moscow, 119285
References
1. Sherstyuk, V. M. (2004). Pravo byt’ vyslushannym i byt’ uslyshannym — printsip grazhdanskogo protsessual’nogo prava [The right to be listened to and to be heard — a principle of civil procedural law]. In M. K. Treushnikov (Ed.), Zametki o sovremennom grazhdanskom i arbitrazhnom protsessual’nom prave. Gorodets.
2. Lyu G., & Zhou, S. (2018). Functional-equivalent approach in UNCITRAL electronic commerce legislation. In X. Xiao & H. Xue (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2018 2nd international conference on management, education and social science (ICMESS 2018): Vol. 176 (pp. 1542–1545). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/icmess-18.2018.338
3. Vinogradov, V. A. (2024). Prava i svobody cheloveka i grazhdanina v tsifrovuyu epokhu: gosudarstva versus IT-giganty [Human and civil rights and freedoms in the digital age: States versus IT Giants]. Zhurnal Rossiyskogo Prava, 28(9),72–87. https://doi.org/10.61205/s160565900030998-1
4. European Law Institute, & UNIDROIT. (Eds.). (2021). ELI — Unidroit Model European Rules of Civil Procedure: From transnational principles to European rules of civil procedure. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198866589.001.0001
5. Jabir, H., Lagtati, K., & Pohe-Tokpa, D. (2024). Ethical and legal regulation of using artificial intelligence in Morocco. Journal of Digital Technologies and Law, 2(2), 450–472. https://doi.org/10.21202/jdtl.2024.23
6. Reiling, D., & Contini, F. (2022). E-justice platforms: Challenges for judicial governance. International Journal for Court Administration, 13(1), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.36745/ijca.445
7. Lukianova, I. N. (2020). Mesto iskusstvennogo intellekta v sudebnoy zashchite prav (rukovodstvuyas’ podkhodami Tamary Yevgen’yevny Abovoy) [The place of artificial intelligence in judicial protection of rights]. Treteyskiy Sud, (1/2), 134–146.
Review
Views:
13
Email this article 