rusjelRussian Journal of Economics and LawRussian Journal of Economics and Law2782-2923"TCE "Taglimat"" Ltd.10.21202/2782-2923.2024.1.105-120rusjel-2516Research ArticleПРЕДПРИНИМАТЕЛЬСКОЕ ПРАВОENTREPRENEURSHIP LAWУрегулирование конфликта интересов в судебной и адвокатской деятельности: общие и специальные вопросы (на примере групповых производств)Settling a conflict of interest in judicial and lawyer activity: general and specific issues (by the example of class proceedings)https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6946-3327БелослудцевО. С.BelosludtsevO. S.

Белослудцев Олег Станиславович, кандидат юридических наук, доцент кафедры государственного и административного права

Scopus Author ID: 58031318900

г. Саранск

Oleg S. Belosludtsev, Cand. Sci. (Law), Associate Professor of the Department of Public and Administrative Law

Scopus Author ID: 58031318900

Saransk

adm.pravo601@yandex.ruhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-4219-8345ГинзбургИ. В.GinzburgI. V.

Гинзбург Ирина Владимировна, кандидат юридических наук, доцент, доцент кафедры гражданского права и процесса

Web of Science Researcher ID: http://www.researcherid.com/rid/N-6193-2016

г. Саранск

Irina V. Ginzburg, Cand. Sci. (Law), Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Department of Civil Law and Procedure

Web of Science Researcher ID: http://www.researcherid.com/rid/N-6193-2016

Saransk

civil_mrsu@mail.ruМордовский государственный университет им. Н. П. ОгареваРоссияMordovia State University named after N. P. OgarevRussian Federation202419032024181105120Copyright © Белослудцев О.С., Гинзбург И.В., 20242024Белослудцев О.С., Гинзбург И.В.Belosludtsev O.S., Ginzburg I.V.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.rusjel.ru/jour/article/view/2516

Цель: уточнение понятия «конфликт интересов», выявление особенностей урегулирования конфликта интересов в групповых производствах, а также выработка практических рекомендаций по предотвращению конфликта интересов в судебной и адвокатской деятельности.Методы: диалектический подход к познанию социальных явлений, позволяющий проанализировать их в историческом развитии и функционировании в контексте совокупности объективных и субъективных факторов, который определил выбор следующих методов исследования: формально-юридический и сравнительно-правовой.Результаты: объективная невозможность законодательного закрепления всех возможных вариантов конфликтов интересов обуславливает необходимость разрешения вопросов как «реального», так и «кажущегося» конфликта интересов непосредственно самим правоприменителем. Отсутствие надлежащих правил и рекомендаций вызывает неопределенность в вопросе о наличии (отсутствии) конфликта интересов судьи. В статье сформулированы основные признаки конфликта интересов: а) наличие противоречия между личными (частными) интересами судьи и принципами осуществления правосудия; б) личная заинтересованность судьи; в) финансовая заинтересованность судьи; г) наличие юридического факта, подтверждающего конфликт интересов; д) необходимость информирования лиц, участвующих в деле о конфликте интересов; е) бремя доказывания основания для отвода лежит на заявителе. Кроме того, дана правовая оценка мерам урегулирования конфликта интересов в судебной деятельности, а также обозначены подходы и предложения по совершенствованию института урегулирования конфликта интересов в судебной и адвокатской деятельности, выявлены особенности урегулирования конфликта интересов в групповых производствах.Научная новизна: в статье представлено комплексное исследование института конфликта интересов в судебной и адвокатской деятельности, в котором выявлены основные признаки конфликта интересов в судебной и адвокатской деятельности, определены особенности урегулирования конфликта интересов в производстве по защите прав и законных интересов группы лиц, осуществлен сравнительно-правовой анализ зарубежной и российской правоприменительной практики по вопросу урегулирования конфликтов интересов.Практическая значимость: основные выводы статьи могут быть использованы в правотворческой деятельности при совершенствовании правового регулирования института конфликта интересов. Сформулированные положения и выводы могут применяться при чтении лекций, проведении семинарских занятий, подготовке методических материалов по юридическим дисциплинам.

Objective: to clarify the concept of “conflict of interest”, to identify the peculiarities of conflict of interest resolution in group proceedings, and to develop practical recommendations to prevent conflict of interest in judicial and advocacy activities.Methods: dialectical approach to cognition of social phenomena, allowing to analyze them in historical development and functioning in the context of the totality of objective and subjective factors, which predetermined the following research methods: formal-logical and comparative-legal.Results: the objective impossibility of legislatively stipulating all possible variants of conflicts of interest makes it necessary to resolve both “real” and “seeming” conflicts of interest directly by the law enforcer. The lack of appropriate rules and recommendations causes uncertainty regarding the presence (absence) of a judge’s conflict of interest. The article formulates the main signs of a conflict of interest: a) a contradiction between the personal (private) interests of a judge and the principles of justice; b) personal interest of a judge; c) financial interest of a judge; d) the existence of a legal fact confirming the conflict of interest; e) the need to inform the persons involved in the case about the conflict of interest; f) the burden of proving the grounds for recusal lies with the applicant. In addition, the author provides a legal assessment of the measures of settling a conflict of interest in judicial activity, outlines approaches and proposals to improve the institute of conflict of interest settlement in judicial and advocacy activities, and reveals the peculiarities of conflict of interest settlement in group proceedings.Scientific novelty: the article presents a comprehensive study of the institute of conflict of interest in judicial and advocacy activities, in which the main features of conflict of interest in judicial and advocacy activities are identified, the peculiarities of conflict of interest settlement in proceedings for the protection of rights and legitimate interests of a group of persons are determined, a comparative legal analysis of foreign and Russian law enforcement practice on the conflicts of interest settlement is carried out.Practical significance: the main conclusions of the article can be used in law-making activities to improve the legal regulation of the conflict of interest institute. The formulated provisions and conclusions can be used in lectures, seminars, preparation of methodological materials on legal disciplines.

конфликт интересовсудебная деятельностьотвод судьеадвокатская деятельностьфидуциарные обязанностигрупповое производствоconflict of interestjudicial activityrecusal of a judgeadvocacyfiduciary dutiesgroup proceedingsReferencesРябцева, Е. В. (2021). Способы правового регулирования конфликтов интересов в судебной деятельности. Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Право, 12(4), 935–948.Coben, J. R. (2013). Creating a 21st Century Oligarchy: Judicial Abdication to Class Action Mediators. Arbitration Law Review, 5, 162–193.Севальнев, В. В., Черепанова, Е. В. (2017). Конфликт интересов как правовой феномен в публичной сфере. Журнал российского права, 10, 143–151. https://doi.org/10.12737/article_59c4d75e1bf445.36849459Coffee, J. C. Jr. (1986). Understanding the Plaintiff Understanding the Plaintiff's Attorney: The Implications of Economic Theory for Private Enforcement of Law Through Class and Derivative Actions. Columbia Law Review, 86(4), 669–727. https:// doi.org/10.2307/1122577Хабриева, Т. Я., Капустин, А. Я., Габов, А. В., Черногор, Н. Н. (2018). Конфликт интересов: природа, предупреждение, социальное регулирование. Журнал зарубежного законодательства и сравнительного правоведения, 3, 5–12. https://doi.org/10.12737/art.2018.3.1Coffee, J. C. Jr. (1987). The Regulation of Entrepreneurial Litigation: Balancing Fairness and Efficiency in the Large Class Action. The University of Chicago Law, 54(3), 877–937. https://doi.org/10.2307/1599829Coben, J. R. (2013). Creating a 21st Century Oligarchy: Judicial Abdication to Class Action Mediators. Arbitration Law Review, 5, 162–193.Degeling, S., & Legg, M. (2014). Fiduciary Obligations of Lawyers in Australian Class Actions: Conflicts Between Duties. UNSW Law Journal, 37(3), 914. http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UNSWLawJl/2014/33.html#fn82Coffee, J. C. Jr. (1986). Understanding the Plaintiff Understanding the Plaintiff's Attorney: The Implications of Economic Theory for Private Enforcement of Law Through Class and Derivative Actions. Columbia Law Review, 86(4), 669–727. https://doi.org/10.2307/1122577Fabri, H. R. (2019). Conflicts of Interests: Navigating in the Fog. AJIL Unbound, 113, 307–311. https://doi.org/10.1017/aju.2019.43Coffee, J. C. Jr. (1987). The Regulation of Entrepreneurial Litigation: Balancing Fairness and Efficiency in the Large Class Action. The University of Chicago Law, 54(3), 877–937. https://doi.org/10.2307/1599829Golru, S. (2019, January). How Do the Fiduciary Duties of Solicitors and Issues of Conflict of Interest Impact on Class Actions and Litigation Funding? SSRN Electronic Journal. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3905636Degeling, S., & Legg, M. (2014). Fiduciary Obligations of Lawyers in Australian Class Actions: Conflicts Between Duties. UNSW Law Journal, 37(3), 914. http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UNSWLawJl/2014/33.html#fn82Johnson, B. B., & Parton, J. N. (2021). Judges Breaking the Law: An Empirical Study of Financially Interested Judges Deciding Cases. North Carolina Law Review, 99(1). https://scholarship.law.unc.edu/nclr/vol99/iss1/2Fabri, H. R. (2019). Conflicts of Interests: Navigating in the Fog. AJIL Unbound, 113, 307–311. https://doi.org/10.1017/aju.2019.43Khabrieva, T. Y., Kapustin, A. Ya., Gabov, A. V., & Chernogor, N. N. (2018). Conflict of interest: nature, prevention, social regulation. Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law, 3, 5–12. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.12737/art.2018.3.1Golru, S. (2019, January). How Do the Fiduciary Duties of Solicitors and Issues of Conflict of Interest Impact on Class Actions and Litigation Funding? SSRN Electronic Journal. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3905636Leubsdorf, J. (2010). Conflicts of Interest: Slicing the Hot Potato Doctrine. Rutgers School of Law-Newark Research Paper, 079. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1662130Johnson, B. B., & Parton, J. N. (2021). Judges Breaking the Law: An Empirical Study of Financially Interested Judges Deciding Cases. North Carolina Law Review, 99(1). https://scholarship.law.unc.edu/nclr/vol99/iss1/2Macey, J. R., & Geoffrey, P. M. (1991). The Plaintiffs Attorney’s Role in Class Action and Derivative Litigation: Economic Analysis and Recommendations for Reform. University of Chicago Law Review, 58(1). https://doi.org/10.2307/1599901Leubsdorf, J. (2010). Conflicts of Interest: Slicing the Hot Potato Doctrine. Rutgers School of Law-Newark Research Paper, 079. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1662130Miller, G. P. (1987). Some Agency Problems in Settlement. Journal of Legal Studies, 16(1), 189–215. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/467828Macey, J. R., & Geoffrey, P. M. (1991). The Plaintiffs Attorney’s Role in Class Action and Derivative Litigation: Economic Analysis and Recommendations for Reform. University of Chicago Law Review, 58(1). https://doi.org/10.2307/1599901Miller, G. P. (2003). Conflicts of Interest in Class Action Litigation: An Inquiry into the Appropriate Standard. NYU, Ctr for Law and Business Research Paper, 03-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.446942Miller, G. P. (1987). Some Agency Problems in Settlement. Journal of Legal Studies, 16(1), 189–215. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/467828Moore, N. J. (2002). Who Should Regulate Class Action Lawyers? SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.316639Miller, G. P. (2003). Conflicts of Interest in Class Action Litigation: An Inquiry into the Appropriate Standard. NYU, Ctr for Law and Business Research Paper, 03-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.446942Piché, C. (2010). Judging Fairness in Class Action Settlements. Windsor Yearbook on Access to Justice, 28-1, 111–151.Moore, N. J. (2002). Who Should Regulate Class Action Lawyers? SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.316639Resnik, J. (1986). Failing Faith: Adjudicatory Procedure in Decline. The University of Chicago Law Review, 53(2), 494–560. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4464&context=uclrevPiché, C. (2010). Judging Fairness in Class Action Settlements. Windsor Yearbook on Access to Justice, 28-1, 111–151.Rotman, L. I. (1996). Fiduciary Doctrine: A Concept in Need of Understanding. Alberta Law Review, 34(4). https://doi.org/10.29173/alr1074Resnik, J. (1986). Failing Faith: Adjudicatory Procedure in Decline. The University of Chicago Law Review, 53(2), 494–560. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4464&context=uclrevRotman, L. I. (2017). Understanding Fiduciary Duties and Relationship Fiduciarity. McGill Law Journal, 62(4). https://ssrn.com/abstract=3078806Rotman, L. I. (1996). Fiduciary Doctrine: A Concept in Need of Understanding. Alberta Law Review, 34(4). https://doi.org/10.29173/alr1074Ryabtseva, E. V. (2021). The problem of determining ways of legal regulation for conflicts of interest in judicial activity. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Law, 12(4), 935–948. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu14.2021.408Rotman, L. I. (2017). Understanding Fiduciary Duties and Relationship Fiduciarity. McGill Law Journal, 62(4). https://ssrn.com/abstract=3078806Sevalnev, V. V., & Cherepanova, E. V. (2017). Conflict of Interest as a Legal Phenomenon in the Public Sphere. Journal of Russian Law, 10, 143–151. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.12737/article_59c4d75e1bf445.36849459Taylor, E. B. (2023). Coming at the King: A Summary of the 2021 and 2022 Amendments to the Rules Governing Recusal of Judges in Louisiana’s Civil District Courts. Loyola Law Review, 69, 472–509.Taylor, E. B. (2023). Coming at the King: A Summary of the 2021 and 2022 Amendments to the Rules Governing Recusal of Judges in Louisiana’s Civil District Courts. Loyola Law Review, 69, 472–509.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.