The Effect Of Clarity And Ambiguity In Recognizing The Abuse Of Procedural Rights By The Courts In The Legal Relations Of Corporates

Abstract

The judgments of the courts must be substantiated and documented by the articles of the law and the principles based on which the judgment was issued, it seems that the capacity existing in the above-mentioned principle regarding the reference to the principles in issuing judicial opinions has not been properly paid attention to. The judges of the courts actually refer to the principles, but apparently this is not done methodically and systematically. Therefore, in addition to the conceptualization of legal principles in examining the rules governing the justified reference to the aforementioned principles in judicial proceedings, what has been considered is the preparation of recommendations or guiding principles for the use of court judges in order to properly cite legal principles? The legal category of procedural right abuse is one of the most problematic categories in terms of law enforcement. The difficulty of its application lies in the fact that the actions of procedural relation participants cannot be assessed by the court from the position of the motive that guided the party and the goal setting of the participants in relation to the general goal of civil proceedings - the correct and timely consideration of a case. All this determines the importance of clarity and unambiguity principle setting when the courts determine the abuse of procedural rights in corporate legal relations. In this article, the author analyzes law enforcement practice, which is aimed at establishing the principle of clarity and unambiguity operation in corporate legal relations, in relation to the category of procedural right abuse.