ON THE ISSUE ABOUT THE CONCEPT OF ATTORNEY’S MONOPOLY AND THE RIGHT TO ITS EXISTENCE IN THE RUSSIAN EGISLATION
- Authors: Vainerman F.V.1
-
Affiliations:
- Samara National Research University
- Issue: Vol 3, No 1 (2017)
- Pages: 99-105
- Section: Tribune of young scientist
- URL: https://journals.ssau.ru/jjsu/article/view/5111
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.18287/2542-047X-2017-3-1-99-105
- ID: 5111
Cite item
Full Text
Abstract
In the article the issue about the necessity of introduction of
attorney’s monopoly in the Russian Federation is viewed. The
aim of carrying out the investigation of the given legal institute
was to identify legal problems that should be solved by means of
introduction of attorney’s monopoly. The introduction of attorney’s
monopoly on special categories of cases is determined by the
necessity of bringing into life of constitutional right on receiving
professional legal advice. The assignment of right to represent
interests in special categories of cases to the attorneys’ community
is due to the peculiarities of lawyer’s legal status and the availability
of special knowledge, established by passing the qualification
examination.
About the authors
F. V. Vainerman
Samara National Research University
Author for correspondence.
Email: morenovsv@ssau.ru
References
- Postanovlenie Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiiskoi Federatsii ot 16 iiulia 2004 g. N 15-p «Po delu o proverke konstitutsionnosti chasti 5 stat’i 59 Arbitrazhnogo protsessual’nogo kodeksa Rossiiskoi Federatsii v sviazi s zaprosami Gosudarstvennogo sobraniia – Kurultaia Respubliki Bashkortostan, Gubernatora Iaroslavskoi oblasti, Arbitrazhnogo suda Krasnoiarskogo kraia,
- zhalobami riada organizatsii i grazhdan» [Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated July 16, № 15-p «On the case about the verification of constitutionality of part 5 Article 59 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in connection with the requests of the State Assembly – Kurultai of the Republic of Bashkortostan, Governor of the
- Yaroslavl Region, Arbitrazh Court of the Krasnoyarsk Region, complaints of a number of organizations and citizens»]. Rossiiskaia gazeta [Russian Newspaper], 2004, July [in Russian].
- Pilipenko Yu. Advokatskaia monopoliia ne ogranichivaet rynok pravovoi pomoshchi
- [Attorney’s monopoly doesn’t restrict the market of legal assistance]. Rossiiskaia gazeta [Russian
- Newspaper], 2015, no. 6620(, pp. 4–5 [in Russian].
- Bakayanova N.M. O perspektivakh advokatskoi monopolii [On prospects of attorney’s monopoly]. Voprosy sovremennoi iurisprudentsii [Issues of Modern Jurisprudence], 2015, no. 54–55, pp. 134–140 [in Russian].
- Shapran N.V., Panchenko V.Yu. Eshche raz ob advokatskoi monopolii [One more time about attorney’s monopoly]. In: Problemy obespecheniia, realizatsii, zashchity konstitutsionnykh prav i svobod cheloveka [Issues of ensuring, realization, protection of constitutional rights and freedoms of a person], 2015, no. 4, pp. 414–419 [in Russian].
- Solovieva Yu.I. Pravovoi status advokata v usloviiakh sudebnoi reformy Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Legal status of an attorney in conditions of judicial reform in the Russian Federation]. Aktual’nye problemy rossiiskogo prava [Actual Problems of Russian Law], 2012, no. 4, pp. 289–296 [in Russian].
- Panchenko V.Yu. O strategii razvitiia sistemy iuridicheskoi pomoshchi v gosudarstvennoi
- programme «Iustitsiia» [On the strategy of development of the system of legal assistance in the
- state program «Justice»]. Iuridicheskaia tekhnika [Juridical Techniques], 2015, no. 9, pp. 533–[in Russian].
- Kazikhanova S.S. Nekotorye voprosy primeneniia stat’i 50 GPK RF o predstaviteliakh, naznachaemykh sudom [Some issues of application of the Article 50 of Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation about the representatives appointed by the court]. Aktual’nye problemy rossiiskogo prava [Actual Problems of Russian Law], 2015, no. 1, pp. 100–106 [in Russian].
- Kuznetsova E. Pervyi shag k monopolii administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva [First step to
- the monopoly of administrative legal proceedings]. Iurist [Jurist], 2015, no. 9, pp. 9–[in Russian].
Supplementary files
