Grounds for canceling illegal judicial decisions
( Pp. 143-148)

Task. The author of the article has set several tasks - identification, description and analysis of some judicial errors that are grounds for canceling court decisions in civil cases. To solve these problems, the content of grounds for cancellation and related features of the main properties of judicial decisions are studied. Model. To solve this task, it is necessary to investigate cases of erroneous application of legal norms by courts, which are the result of non-compliance with the requirements imposed by law to judicial decisions. Findings. The main procedural forms of protection of rights and legitimate interests use illegality and unreasonableness as the main grounds for canceling (or changing) court decisions. Improper application of substantive and procedural law (illegality) is one of the main judicial errors. At the same time, the failure of the courts to observe the principle of unity of judicial practice established by the verification courts leads to the cancellation of illegal court decisions. The scope of the study. They are limited by the relations that develop between participants in civil and arbitration proceedings. Practical value. Identifying and studying the grounds for canceling or changing erroneous decisions will help to improve the quality of court decisions and reduce the number of illegal decisions. Social consequences. The detection of cases of improper application of substantive and procedural law will help to ensure uniformity in the interpretation and application of legal norms by courts and increase the confidence of citizens in the law and the court. Originality, value. Systematic study and study of the reasons for the improper performance of maintenance obligations, the identification of common problems that impede the proper fulfillment of obligations in practice, will help to formulate general approaches to the enforcement of court decisions on the recovery of alimony. The analysis of the norms of the legislation of the Russian Federation makes it possible to identify additional opportunities for the implementation of the protection of the property rights of the child.

Lebed K.A., (2020), GROUNDS FOR CANCELING ILLEGAL JUDICIAL DECISIONS. Sociopolitical Sciences, 3 => 143-148.

Щеглов В.Н. Законность и обоснованность судебного решения по гражданско-правовому спору. 1958.
Клейнман А.Ф. Обжалование и опротестование судебных решений и определений, не вступивших в законную силу // Труды первой научной сессии ВИЮН. М., 1940
Zagaynova S.K. Sudebnye akty v mekhanizme realizatsii sudebnoy vlasti v grazhdanskom i arbitrazhnom protsesse. M., 2007.
Grazhdanskoe protsessual noe pravo / pod red. prof. M.S. SHakaryan. M., 2004; Arbitrazhnyy protsess / otv. red. prof. V.V. YArkov. M., 2003
Комментарий к Арбитражному процессуальному кодексу Российской Федерации / под ред. В.Ф. Яковлева и М.К. Юкова. М., 2003.
Zeyder N.B. Sudebnoe reshenie po grazhdanskomu delu. M., 1966.
Ткачев Н.И. Законность и обоснованность судебных постановлений по гражданским делам. Саратов, 1987
Opredelenie sudebnoy kollegii po grazhdanskim delam Moskovskogo oblastnogo suda ot 2 fevralya 2012 g. po delu № 33-2810 // Byulleten sudebnoy praktiki Moskovskogo oblastnogo suda za IV kvartal 2011 g. (utv. prezidiumom Mosoblsuda 04.04.2012).
Vilkova T.YU. Nepreryvnost sudebnogo razbiratel stva kak mezhotraslevoy printsip sudoproizvodstva // ZHurnal rossiyskogo prava. 2018. № 2. S. 94-104. (Istochnik: SPS Konsul tantPlyus .)
SHemeneva O.N. Rol soglasheniy storon v grazhdanskom sudoproizvodstve. M.: Infotropik Media, 2017. (Istochnik: SPS Konsul tantPlyus .)
Punkt 8 postanovleniya Plenuma Verkhovnogo Suda RF ot 26 iyunya 2008 g. № 13 O primenenii norm Grazhdanskogo protsessual nogo kodeksa Rossiyskoy Federatsii pri rassmotrenii i razreshenii del v sude pervoy instantsii // Byulleten Verkhovnogo Suda RF. 2008. № 10.
VS priznal nedeystvitel nymi kvitantsii iz GIBDD bez elektronnoy podpisi // Rossiyskaya gazeta. URL: https:// rg.ru/2016/04/16/voditeliu-otmenili-shtraf-iz-za-otsutstviia- elektronnoj-podpisi-inspektora.html
Postanovlenie Verkhovnogo Suda RF ot 11.11.2016 № 44-AD16-28. (Istochnik: SPS Konsul tantPlyus .)
Apellyatsionnoe opredelenie Mosoblsuda ot 11 marta 2019 g. № 33-221/2019.
Opredelenie Verkhovnogo Suda RF ot 4 dekabrya 2019 g. № 4-KG19-64.

grounds for canceling the decision of the justice, error of the court, civil procedure, arbitress procedure.