from 01.01.2014 to 01.01.2021
Moskovsky District Court of St. Petersburg (Judge)
from 01.01.2015 to 01.01.2021
St. Petersburg, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation
UDK 340.158 Социалистическое право и право коммунистического общества
Introduction. The Soviet law postulated the priority of the interests of children as the main principle of resolving family disputes. The Modern Russian legislator has adopted this approach. Currently, cases of mandatory consent of children to perform a legally significant action have been established and the procedure for ascertaining the opinion of minors has been regulated. Did a child have the right to vote in Soviet courts? The answer to this question will help to understand the historical background of the formation of the juvenile justice in Russia. Methods. The study was based on dialectics, which acts as a general methodology of scientific knowledge. General scientific, special and specific scientific methods were used. A generalization of the judicial practice of the Soviet period was carried out using analysis, synthesis, induction and deduction. The results obtained were processed using the interpretive method. A comparison of legal regulation in different historical periods is carried out (comparative research method). The principle of historicism made it possible to assess the dynamics of the development of the child’s right to express his opinion when resolving a dispute and to identify cause-and-effect relationships between the Soviet and modern approaches to this issue. Results. It was revealed that in the Soviet Russia the question of taking into account the opinions of children when resolving disputes about their upbringing was raised by judicial practice: first in individual cases, then in uniform explanations. The court was required to take into account the views of children. The forms of ascertaining the child’s wishes were different; priority was given to out-of-court interviews. The older the children were, the more likely it was that a decision would be made in accordance with their wishes. At the same time, the practice of courts, which limited themselves only to the child’s opinion, received a negative assessment. It was necessary to evaluate how well the children’s wishes corresponded to their real interests, the reasons for the lack of contact with persons applying for education, and the living conditions that were created for the children. The continuity of the Soviet experience in modern legal regulation of taking into account the child’s opinion in family disputes is revealed. The requirements developed by Soviet lawyers are applicable to modern court cases.
Soviet family law, family legal relations, children’s rights, parental rights, taking into account the opinions of children when resolving disputes about their upbringing
1. Nizhnik N. S. Russkoe semeynoe pravo (dosovetskiy period). – Chelyabinsk: Chelyabinskiy yuridicheskiy institut MVD Rossii, 1999. – 115 s.
2. Nizhnik N. S. Zaschita interesov nesovershennoletnih v Rossii. – Chelyabinsk: Chelyabinskiy yuridicheskiy institut MVD Rossii, 2000. – 183 s.
3. Nizhnik N. S. Pravovoe regulirovanie brachno-semeynyh otnosheniy v russkoy istorii (IX – nachalo XX veka). – Sankt-Peterburg: Sankt-Peterburgskiy universitet MVD Rossii, 2002. – 278 s.
4. Nizhnik N. S., Arakcheev V. A. i dr. Institut sem'i i braka: transformacii v kontekste gosudarstvenno-pravovoy evolyucii v pervye gody sovetskoy vlasti / Evolyuciya politicheskoy i pravovoy kul'tury Rossii. Regional'nye osobennosti i vliyanie evropeyskogo faktora : monografiya. – Velikiy Novgorod: Novgorodskiy Mezhregional'nyy institut obschestvennyh nauk, 2006. – S. 162–169.
5. Burdanova N. A. Pravovoe regulirovanie otnosheniy, voznikayuschih mezhdu roditelyami i det'mi pri razdel'nom prozhivanii roditeley: istoriko-pravovoy aspekt // Obschestvo. Sreda. Razvitie. – 2010. – № 3 (16). – S. 102–105.
6. Burdanova N. A. Osuschestvlenie lichnyh neimuschestvennyh roditel'skih prav i obyazannostey po vospitaniyu detey kak faktor formirovaniya professional'noy kul'tury i social'noy otvetstvennosti gosudarstvennyh sluzhaschih organov i uchrezhdeniy yusticii v monarhicheskoy Rossii / Aktual'nye voprosy formirovaniya vysokoy professional'noy i social'noy otvetstvennosti v deyatel'nosti organov i uchrezhdeniy Minyusta Rossii : materialy Vserossiyskoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferencii. Sankt-Peterburg, 27 fevralya 2014 goda. – Sankt-Peterburg: Sankt-Peterburgskiy institut (filial) Vserossiyskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta yusticii (RPA Minyusta Rossii), 2014. – S. 55–58.
7. Burdanova N. A. Reformy instituta lichnyh neimuschestvennyh roditel'skih prav i obyazannostey v monarhicheskiy period istorii otechestvennogo gosudarstva / Reformy v povsednevnoy zhizni naseleniya Rossii: istoriya i sovremennost': materialy Mezhdunarodnoy nauchnoy konferencii. Sankt-Peterburg, 2–4 aprelya 2020 goda / otv. red. V. A. Veremenko, V. N. Shaydurov. – Sankt-Peterburg: Leningradskiy gosudarstvennyy universitet im. A. S. Pushkina, 2020. – T. 2. – S. 129–133.
8. Nizhnik N. S. God 1917: nachalo revolyucii v semeyno-brachnyh otnosheniyah // Grazhdanskoe obschestvo v Rossii i za rubezhom. – 2017. – № 4. – S. 25–31.
9. Burdanova N. A. Institut lichnyh neimuschestvennyh prav i obyazannostey roditeley v prave Sovetskoy Rossii // Istoriya gosudarstva i prava. – 2021. – № 6. – S. 75–80; doi:https://doi.org/10.18572/1812-3805-2021-6-75-80.
10. Burdanova N. A. Kak zastavit' rebenka polyubit' vzroslyh rodstvennikov: opyt sudebnogo uregulirovaniya vnutrisemeynyh otnosheniy / Sem'ya i detstvo v povsednevnoy zhizni: istoriya i sovremennost' : materialy Mezhdunarodnoy nauchnoy konferencii: v 2 t. Sankt-Peterburg, 6–8 aprelya 2023 goda. – Sankt-Peterburg: Leningradskiy gosudarstvennyy universitet imeni A. S. Pushkina, 2023. – T. 1. – S. 220–224.
11. Burdanova N. A. K voprosu o vybore sposoba zaschity roditel'skih prav: policiya, organ opeki i popechitel'stva ili sud? / Gosudarstvo i pravo: evolyuciya, sovremennoe sostoyanie, perspektivy razvitiya (navstrechu 300-letiyu rossiyskoy policii): materialy XIV Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-teoreticheskoy konferencii, Sankt-Peterburg, 27–28 aprelya 2017 goda. Sankt-Peterburgskiy universitet MVD Rossii.– Sankt-Peterburg: Sankt-Peterburgskiy universitet Ministerstva vnutrennih del Rossiyskoy Federacii, 2017. – T. 2. – S. 95–98.
12. Vorozheykin E. M. Semeynye pravootnosheniya v SSSR. – Moskva: Yuridicheskaya literatura, 1972. – 336 s.
13. Ershova N. M. Pravovye voprosy vospitaniya detey v sem'e. – Moskva: Nauka, 1971. – 102 s.
14. Rabinovich N. V. Lichnye i imuschestvennye otnosheniya v sovetskoy sem'e / Leningradskiy gosudarstvennyy ordena Lenina universitet im. A. A. Zhdanova. – Leningrad: Izdatel'stvo Leningradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 1952. – 160 s.
15. Tarhov V. A. Sovetskoe semeynoe pravo. – Saratov: Izdatel'stvo Saratovskogo universiteta, 1963. – 104 s.
16. Kornev A. V. Raz'yasneniya plenumov vysshih sudov po voprosam sudebnoy praktiki kak specificheskiy istochnik sovetskogo prava // Istoriya gosudarstva i prava. – 2015. – № 5. – S. 42–46.
17. Bazarbaev B. B., Basin Yu. G., Bespalova A. I. [i dr.]. Semeynoe pravo / pod red. A. I. Bespalovoy, U. K. Ihsanova. – Alma-Ata: Mektep, 1984. – 248 s.
18. Maksimovich L. B. O prave rebenka vyrazhat' svoe mnenie / Problemy grazhdanskogo, semeynogo i zhilischnogo zakonodatel'stva: sbornik statey / otv. red. V. N. Litovkin. – Moskva: Gorodec, 2005. – S. 58–70.
19. Baskakov E. Ya., Efimov A. F., Zhuykov V. M. [i dr.]. Osobennosti rassmotreniya i razresheniya otdel'nyh kategoriy grazhdanskih del (iskovoe proizvodstvo) / pod red. I. K. Piskareva. – Moskva: Gorodec, 2005. – 512 s.
20. Opalev R. O. Ocenochnye ponyatiya v arbitrazhnom i grazhdanskom processual'nom prave. – Moskva: Volters Kluver, 2008. – 234 s.
21. Batova O. S. Osobennosti processual'nogo polozheniya nesovershennoletnego po delam, svyazannym s vospitaniem detey / Problemnye voprosy grazhdanskogo i arbitrazhnogo processov; pod red. L. F. Lesnickoy, M. A. Rozhkovoy. – Moskva: Statut, 2008. – S. 438–450.
22. Avdonina Yu. N. Osobennosti sub'ektnogo sostava po delam o zaschite prav nesovershennoletnih v grazhdanskom processe: postanovka problemy // Vestnik grazhdanskogo processa. – 2022. – № 6. – S. 205–223; doi:https://doi.org/10.24031/2226-0781-2022-12-6-205-223.
23. Alekseev A. A. Problemy neposredstvennogo uchastiya nesovershennoletnih lic v grazhdanskom processe // Arbitrazhnyy i grazhdanskiy process. – 2017. – № 10. – S. 17–21.
24. Sitdikova L. B. Problemnye voprosy pravovogo statusa nesovershennoletnego svidetelya v grazhdanskom processe // Yuridicheskiy mir. – 2016. – № 9. – S. 45–48.
25. Erdelevskiy A. M. Pravo rebenka na vyrazhenie mneniya. [Elektronnyy resurs]: podgotovlen dlya sistemy Konsul'tantPlyus, 2001 // SPS «Konsul'tantPlyus» / URL: https://online.consultant.ru/riv/cgi/online.cgi?req=doc&base=CJI&n=411#BbCDSzTGagmxJDq01 (data obrascheniya: 25.12.2023).
26. Procenko E. D., Komarnickiy A. V. Zaschita prav nesovershennoletnih v sovetskom gosudarstve: retrospektivnyy analiz zakonodatel'stva // Leningradskiy yuridicheskiy zhurnal. – 2018. – № 3 (53). – S. 42–52.
