Issue 4 (22) 2013

Frolovich_Lubimova_EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION OF CLAIMS Sued by the Testator’s Creditors

EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION OF CLAIMS Sued by the Testator’s Creditors

E.M. Frolovich

Perm State National Research University
15, Bukirev st., Perm, 614990
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

E.V. Lubimova

Perm State National Research University
15, Bukirev st., Perm, 614990
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Abstract: The authors of the article analyzed exclusive jurisdiction of claims which sue to creditor of the testator in historical and acting regulations. The authors put together the conditions of the action rules and find three of the four the same clauses. They are the period of the claim, the court jurisdiction and the special ground for suspending the proceedings. The authors revealed a difference in plaintiff: a claim may be made only by the creditor of the testator or any other person.

The article noted the restrictive interpretation of the considered rules on the exclusive jurisdiction.

The competition rules on exclusive jurisdiction caused by different criteria for determining the jurisdiction: object of the claim or subjects of dispute together with period of submission of the claim. Besides the plaintiff could create an alternative jurisdiction in this type of disputes in the case the combination objects of the claim (for example flat and car) in one suit.

According to practical applications of the jurisdiction’s rule and legal position of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation this kind of exclusive jurisdiction has not government’s interest which must be protected. Further courts allow the discretion of the plaintiff to choose the court.

 Keywords: jurisdiction; heritage; subjects of dispute; object of the claim; the condition of the norm; real estate; criteria for determining the jurisdiction; alternative jurisdiction; competition rules on exclusive jurisdiction; suspending the proceedings

Bibliograficheskij spisok

1. Gal'perin S.I., Rotenberg L.M. Ustav grazhdanskogo sudoproizvodstva. Ekaterinoslav: Tip. «Isaak Kogan», 1915. 679 s.

2. Gur'janov P. Prakticheskij kurs grazhdanskogo i ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva dlja podgotovki k jekzamenu na zvanie chastnogo poverennogo. M.: Sklad izdanij: Moskva, B. Presnja, d. №20, 1912. 521 s.

3. Zmirlov K.P. Ustav grazhdanskogo sudoproizvodstva. SPb.: Izd. Jurid. kn. sklada «PRAVO», 1914. 1118 s.

4. Malyshev K. Kurs grazhdanskogo sudoproizvodstva. SPb.: Tip. M.M. Stasjulevicha, 1876. T. 1. 454 s.

5. Rossijskaja gazeta. 2012. №127.

6. Sobranie zakonodatel'stva RF.2001. №49, st. 4552.

7. Sobranie zakonodatel'stva RF. 2002. №46, st. 4532.

8. Sobranie Uzakonenij RSFSR. 1923. №46–47, st. 478.

9. over the Parties or Things – In Rem Jurisdiction and Quasi In Rem Jurisdiction. URL: http://nationalparalegal.edu/public_documents/courseware_asp_ files/researchLitigation/Jurisdiction/InRemJurisdiction.asp (data obrashhenija: 03.08.2013).

10. Milo J.M. Contry report: the Netherlands // The Columbia Journal of European law online. 2012. R. 69–84.

11. Quigley C. European Community Contract Law. London: Kluwer Law International. 1997. 400 p.

12. Stone P. EU Private International Law. Cheltenham, UK. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. 2010. 577 p.

13. The Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa case no: 85/06 // Saflii.org. 2007.