FORMS OF INTERACTION OF ARBITRATION COURTS AND FEDERAL SERVICE FOR FINANCIAL MONITORING AIMED AT COUNTERACTION TOWARDS ILLEGAL FINANCIAL OPERATIONS
( Pp. 347-353)

Goal of the research. The purpose of the research is to identify the optimal forms of procedural interaction between arbitration courts and the Financial Monitoring Service when considering cases by courts, the circumstances of which contain signs of illegal financial transactions. Conclusions. Involvement of Rosfinmonitoring departments in case of suspicious financial transactions can be considered as the demonstration of the principle of judicial management of the process. The main form of involving Rosfinmonitoring bodies as third parties that do not make independent claims on the subject of the dispute, proposed by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in the Review dated July 8, 2020 for commercial courts is not optimal. Taking into account the increasing number of cases, the following forms of interaction with Rosfinmonitoring correspond more to its potential: sending a request for information and evidence by an arbitration court in accordance with Article 66 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, and involving the Service for giving an opinion on the case by analogy with the rules provided for in Article 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure RF. To protect the public interest, Rosfinmonitoring has the right to enter into the proceedings as a third party who does not make independent claims on the subject of the dispute if a real interest in the proceedings arises. The Financial Control Service has the right to participate in the arbitration process by appealing against judicial acts and applying for the resumption of proceedings in cases of suspicious financial transactions in the manner of revising judicial acts on newly discovered circumstances. In the conclusion of the article, a generalized algorithm for the activities of the arbitration court on interaction with the Rosfinmonitoring bodies is presented, the need to coordinate their efforts in the field of counteraction towards the legalization of monetary assets obtained by criminal means, is noted.

Katukova S.Y., Klekachev N.S., (2021), FORMS OF INTERACTION OF ARBITRATION COURTS AND FEDERAL SERVICE FOR FINANCIAL MONITORING AIMED AT COUNTERACTION TOWARDS ILLEGAL FINANCIAL OPERATIONS. Economic Problems and Legal Practice, 3 => 347-353.

Andreeva T.K., Uletova G.D. Novyy etap sudebnoy reformy: konstitutsionnye vozmozhnosti i vyzovy // Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa. 2020. № 2. S. 251-291.
Borisova E., Tuzov D., YArkov V., Mikheenkova M., Rusetskiy A., Tukhvatullin T., Avilkin V. Initsiativnyy sud v sostyazatel nom protsesse: raz yasnenie VS RF o protivodeystvii legalizatsii prestupnykh dokhodov // Zakon. 2020. № 8. S. 21-30.
Vlasov A.A. Grazhdanskiy protsess. M.: YUrayt, 2019. 187 s.
Nekrasov S.YU. Initsiativa suda i sudeyskoe usmotrenie v grazhdanskom i arbitrazhnom protsesse // Glagol pravosudiya. 2017. № 2. S. 19-23.
Orishich E.G. K voprosu o sushchnosti sudebnogo rukovodstva v grazhdanskom protsesse: problemy teoreticheskogo osmysleniya // Politematicheskiy setevoy elektronnyy nauchnyy zhurnal Kubanskogo gosudarstvennogo agrarnogo universiteta. 2006. № 21. S. 321-332.
Fursov D.A. Sovremennoe ponimanie printsipov grazhdanskogo i arbitrazhnogo protsessov. M: Statut, 2009. 80 s.
Ryzhkov K. S. Uchastie tret ikh lits, ne zayavlyayushchikh samostoyatel nye trebovaniya otnositel no predmeta spora, v grazhdanskom protsesse. Avtoref. diss. kand. yurid. nauk. Saratov, 2017. 28 s.
YArkov V.V. Vol nye sudebnye variatsii na temu protsessual nogo prava: chto s nimi delat i kak s nimi borot sya. Kommentariy k Opredeleniyu Sudebnoy kollegii po grazhdanskim delam VS RF ot 17.01.2017 № 36-KG16-26 // Vestnik ekonomicheskogo pravosudiya Rossiyskoy Federatsii. 2017. № 3. S. 27-33.

the principle of judicial management of the process, substantiation, third parties, not making independent claims on the subject of the dispute, financial transactions, the Federal Service for Financial Monitoring, the arbitration court.