Requisitos previos para que una Corte Suprema anule sus opiniones jurídicas vinculantes

• Yevhenii Doiar University of Customs and Finance, Dnipro, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8500-8789
• Pavlo Liutikov University of Customs and Finance, Dnipro, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6173-0128
• Vladyslav Lipynskyi University of Customs and Finance, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4373-3330
• Nataliya Kantor Drohobych State Pedagogical University, Drohobych, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9533-0851

DOI: https://doi.org/10.46925//rdluz.41.34

Palabras clave: Administración de justicia, Jurisprudencia, Derecho comparado, Derecho moderno, Tribunales supremos

Resumen

El artículo tiene como objetivo desarrollar recomendaciones para mejorar las leyes procesales y guiar la jurisprudencia relacionada con las razones por las que un Tribunal Supremo anula sus opiniones jurídicas universalmente vinculantes, con especial énfasis en el contexto legal ucraniano relevante como un ejemplo perfectamente ilustrativo. Este propósito de investigación impulsa la dependencia de un conjunto de métodos científicos apropiados de investigación de Derecho descriptivo y comparado, incluido el análisis comparativo en sí como instrumento fundamental para la revisión del material jurídico relevante, así como los métodos científicos estructurales, analíticos y del Derecho en contexto. El artículo cubre, en particular: a) el marco legal ucraniano y la jurisprudencia que regula la desviación del Tribunal Supremo de Ucrania de sus opiniones jurídicas; b) conceptos de anulación de precedentes de los tribunales más altos de los países más desarrollados con sistema legal de  derecho consuetudinario; c) las opiniones actuales de la comunidad científica y las perspectivas de desarrollo de la jurisprudencia pertinente sobre la anulación de sus opiniones jurídicas por parte del Tribunal Supremo de Ucrania. Los autores sostienen que es de suma importancia fundamentar razones de peso para que un tribunal supremo revise su visión de la correcta aplicación del Derecho, exponiendo las razones para considerar defectuosa la anterior, en la medida que conduce a consecuencias negativas fundamentales.

Citas

Agrawal, S. (2020). Scope and application of the doctrine of precedents under Article 141 of the Constitution of India. https://blog.ipleaders.in/scope-and-application-of-the-doctrine-of-precedents-under-article-141-of-the-constitution/.

Anonymous v. Khersonregiongaz Limited Liability Company no. 766/20797/18, October, 26, 2021. S. Ct. of Ukraine. https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/101829988?fbclid=IwAR0rxYYtw6wnOQUHn0koKs-3eN-odXYhSiw0g-OUMgGUIrnpJZyf8rj_mT4.

Anonymous v. Office of the Security Service of Ukraine in Ternopil oblast, no. 500/2773/20, December, 23, 2021. S. Ct. of Ukraine. https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/102171391.

Bakulina, S., Gudyma, D., Danishevskaya, V., Kibenko, O., Rogach, L., and Urkevich, V. (2018). Separate Opinion: Aiowa LLC v the State Registrar of the Talniv District Department of Justice of the Cherkasy Oblast, no. 823/378/16, June, 12, 2018. S. Ct. of Ukraine. https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/76441988.

Bernazyuk, J. (2020). The juxtaposition of the need to ensure the uniformity of case law and department from the legal opinions of the Supreme Court of Ukraine (on the example of resolving public law disputes). https://sud.ua/ru/news/blog/177404-spivvidnoshennya- neobkhidnosti-zabezpechennya-yednosti-sudovoyi-praktiki-ta-vidstupu-vid-pravovikh-pozitsiy-verkhovnogo-sudu-na-prikladi-virishennya-publichno-pravovikh-sporiv (in Ukrainian).

Bilous, O., Liutikov, P. (2021). The concepts and the essence of interpretation of law. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies. Vol 7, No 1. P. 139-144. doi.org/10.30525/2256-0742/2021-7-1-139- 144.

Code of Administrative Proceedings of Ukraine of 2005, no. 2747-IV. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2747-15#n9495 (in Ukrainian).

Constitution of Ukraine of 1996, no. 254к/96-ВР. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/254%D0%BA/96-%D0%B2%D1%80#n4904я (in Ukrainian).

Goncharov, V. (2013). Dynamic interpretation of legal norms: studies of the Lviv Laboratory of Human Rights and Citizens of the Research Institute of State Building and Local Self - Government of the National Academy of Legal Sciences of Ukraine. Spolom Editorial House. pp. 181-182.

Lipynskyi, V., Liutikov, P. Ulianovska, O. (2021). The main directions of improving the efficiency of interpreting administrative delict legal norms. Journal of law and political sciences. Volume 30. P. 69-90.

LLC ‘Expert’ v Public Joint Stock Company ‘Malinovsky Market’, no. 916/784/19, February, 23, 2021. S. Ct. of Ukraine. https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/95573461.

Luspenyk, D (2018). Objectives of the Supreme Court of Ukraine as a court of cassation. https://sud.ua/ru/news/publication/130875-zavdannya-verkhovnogo-sudu-yak-sudu-kasatsiynoyi-instantsiyi (in Ukrainian).

Ministry of Justice of United Kingdom (2020). Retained EU Case Law. Consultation on the departure from retained EU case law by UK courts and tribunals. https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/departure -from-retained-eu-case law-by- uk-courts-and-tribunals.

Murphy v Brentwood District Council, 1 AC 398, July, 26, 1990. UK House of Lords. https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/murphy-v-brentwood.php#citethis.

Murrill, B. (2018). The Supreme Court’s Overruling of Constitutional Precedent. Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service. 54 p.

Non-Governmental Organization Lviv School of Law. (2021). General report on the outcomes of the grant project ‘Analysis of the case law of the new Supreme Court of Ukraine’. https://newjustice.org.ua/wp - content/uploads/2021/03/Results_Analysis_Supreme_Court_Case_Law_UKR.pdf (in Ukrainian).

On execution of judgments and application of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights Law of Ukraine of 2006, no. 3477-IV. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/3477- 15#Text (in Ukrainian).

Private Enterprise ‘Kolos Chyhyrynshchyny’ v Chyhyryn District State Administration of Cherkasy Region no. 823/2042/16, September, 4, 2018. S. Ct. of Ukraine. https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/77969515.

Pryimachenko D., Liutikov P., Shevchenko M. (2021). Judicial review of the exercise of discretionary powers: case law of European court of human rights and experience from Ukraine. Journal of law and political sciences. Volume: 26. Issue: 1. P. 400-425. https://drive.google.com/file/d/10-qZf0O_M8-CB_Df0CZ9eyxDhNEu348-/view.

Pyvovar, I., Kuzmenko, O., Liutikov, P., Liutikova, M., Kuvakin, S. (2020). Inactivity of public authority as a subject of land dispute in administrative legal proceedings. Revista de la Universidad del Zulia. 2020. Volumen 11, Número 31, P. 360-375. DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.46925//rdluz.31.22

Schultz, D. (2021). The Supreme Court has overturned precedent dozens of times in the past 60 years, including when it struck down legal segregation. https://theconversation.com/the- supreme-court-has-overturned-precedent-dozens-of-times-in-the-past-60-years-including- when-it-struck-down-legal-segregation-168052.

Shumylo, M. (2020). Legal opinions of the court of cassation: inter praeteritum et futurum. https://sud.ua/ru/news/blog/187091-pravovi-visnovki-kasatsiynogo-sudu-inter-praeteritum-et-futurum (in Ukrainian).

South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc., et al., No. 17-494, June 21, 2018, US S. Ct. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/17-494_j4el.pdf.

Spriggs, J., Hansford, T. (2001). Explaining the Overruling of U.S. Supreme Court Precedent. The Journal of Politics. Vol. 63. No. 4. pp. 1091-1111. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2691808.

Statement to the House of Lords by the Lord Chancellor (Lord Gardiner) on Judicial Precedent of July, 26, 1966. https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199697/ldinfo/ld08judg/redbook/redbk45.htm .

Steiner, E. (2015). Comparing the Prospective Effect of Judicial Rulings Across Jurisdictions. Ius Comparatum – Global Studies in Comparative Law. № 4. https://lawexplores.com/the-prospective-and-retrospective-effect-of-judicial-decisions-in-ireland/#Fn139.

Ukraine v. Anonymous, case no. 233/8772/19 (criminal proceedings no. 12019050380001333), January 20, 2021. S. Ct. of Ukraine. https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/94328674 (in Ukrainian).

Walker, J. (2016). The Role of Precedent in the United States: How Do Precedents Lose Their Binding Effect? https://cgc.law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2016/02/CGCP-English-Commentary-15-Judge-Walker.pdf.