Is moral damage caused by the procedural actions of theThis contradiction other party a basis for protection?
How to find a balance between the procedural rights of one party and the rights of the other?
Experience of foreign countries: lessons for Ukraine
Similar issues have long been considered in the legal specific database by industry systems of other This contradiction countries! and their experience may be useful.
USA : The American legal system has a concept of “abuse of process” . If a party intentionally uses the legal process to harm another party! this may be grounds for filing a separate lawsuit. However! the mere fact of filing an appeal without signs of abuse is not considered grounds for compensation.
Germany : Here! the issue of moral damage is regulated very clearly. The main principle is Verhältnismäßigkeit ! i.e. “proportionality”. If the procedural actions were lawful! even if they caused negative emotions! the court will not recognize moral damage. However! if the actions were accompanied by obvious abuse! the court may side with the injured party.
France : French law supports the idea of compensation for moral damages! but only if they are the result of gross procedural violations. The fact of filing an appeal in itself is not considered a basis for compensation! even if it has delayed the proceedings.
What can the joint chamber of the CCS decide?
The situation described in case No. 296/12456/23 may seem ordinary. But it raises important issues that face not only the judicial system! but also society as a whole. The decision of the Supreme last year! the bank of russia issued 3 Court of the Kyrgyz Republic will be decisive. It may formulate several key principles:
Assessment of the merits of the appeal . If the actions of the executive committee had clear signs of a procedural violation (for example! the lack of the full text of the resolution)! the court may recognize ao lists that the plaintiff is entitled to compensation.
Recognizing the balance of interests :
Justice requires that an appeal not become a tool for pressure or obstruction.
Procedural responsibility : Abuse of procedural rights should have consequences! but their assessment requires clear criteria.
My humble opinion
This case! like many others in my practice! reminds me that law is not just about laws! but also about people! their stories! emotions! and the struggle for justice. When a person files a lawsuit seeking compensation for moral damages through the appeal of another party! it is not always a whim or a desire for “revenge.” Sometimes it is a last-ditch attempt to prove that their rights deserve to be protected.
At the same time! protecting the rights of one party should not become a tool for restricting the rights of the other. It seems to me that the key to resolving this case lies in the delicate balance between protecting the rights of each participant in the process.