In any civil case that requires judicial review, there are two parties occupying diametrically opposite positions: the plaintiff and the defendant. In order to prevent further confusion in concepts, we will give definitions for each of the parties. A plaintiff is a person who has appealed to the judiciary in order to protect their own interests or violated rights. The opponent in such a trial is the defendant. At the same time, both parties can be not only individuals, but also organizations that have the status of a legal entity. Today we’ll talk about who the plaintiff is and what rights he has.
Civil plaintiff
A civil plaintiff shall be considered a legal entity or an individual who has submitted claims for compensation for the material damage caused as a result of a crime and recognized as such by the decision of the investigator, prosecutor, inquiry bodies and the court.
In order for the victim to be recognized as a civil plaintiff, the following circumstances must be present:
- data should be provided on the basis of which it could be argued that the crime took place;
- as a result of criminal acts material damage was caused as a result of the crime committed.
From the moment the victim was recognized as a civil plaintiff, he becomes a full participant in the trial. Thus, the plaintiff is a person who has not only rights, but also obligations that are clearly regulated by applicable law.
Rights and obligations of the plaintiff
The plaintiff in the civil process has many statutory rights.
- First of all, the plaintiff must be not only legal, but also competent, and must also attend court hearings. If he cannot attend the trial, the court should be notified in advance.
- Like the defendant, the plaintiff has every right to get acquainted in detail with the case materials, to make copies. This applies not only to documents relating exclusively to the party of the plaintiff, but also to those related to the defendant.
- The plaintiff has the right to challenge, that is, raise the question of the appropriateness of the participation of any persons or materials in the trial in accordance with the reasons provided by law.
- The plaintiff has the right to submit evidence, ask questions to all participants in the process, as well as submit petitions. In particular, he may require evidence presented not only verbally but also in writing. Written petitions are always attached to the case, and oral petitions are recorded in the minutes of the court session.
- The plaintiff has the statutory right to provide reasonable arguments for questions arising during the hearing, to object to petitions made by other persons participating in the trial.
The plaintiff's exclusive rights
In accordance with Art. 39 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, only in the right of the plaintiff:
- to amend the grounds, as well as the subject of the claim;
- change the amount of material compensation requested, both up and down;
- completely abandon claims by concluding a settlement agreement.
Thus, the plaintiff is a person who is vested with exclusive rights. Let's take a little more detailed look at these positions and consider the main nuances.
Change of grounds or subject of action
The subject of the claim is that the plaintiff himself asks. Basis - the circumstances that underlie the claim, together with evidence that fully confirms these facts.
Only the plaintiff has the legal right to change either the subject of the claim itself or the basis on which it was claimed. But it should be remembered that if both the one and the other were replaced, then this will already be a completely different lawsuit, which should be considered in another trial.
Change in the amount of material compensation
The plaintiff, in accordance with the existing law, has every right not only to increase, but also to reduce claims submitted earlier.
This request can be made both orally and in writing and submitted to the court. This decision can be made for a number of reasons. In particular, if during the meeting it turns out that the amount of the claim is much less than the material damage actually caused. Reducing claims is a very rare occurrence and, as a rule, is due to the understanding that a smaller amount of monetary compensation is much better than its complete absence.
A plaintiff is a person who has become a victim of a crime that entails moral, property or physical damage.
Denial of claim
The plaintiff has the right to refuse the claim submitted earlier (in whole or in part) both orally and in writing.
If a decision has been made to completely refuse, then the trial is completely terminated, and a court ruling is issued. In the case of only a partial refusal, the trial continues, but only in part of the claims left.
If the plaintiff decided to refuse the claim, or an amicable agreement was reached, then it should be remembered that:
- repeated appeal with the same wording and claims becomes impossible;
- court costs incurred by the plaintiff, the defendant should not be reimbursed;
- the plaintiff shall without fail compensate the defendant for all expenses incurred by him in connection with the conduct of the case.
Settlement agreement
The conclusion of a settlement agreement can be carried out at any stage of the judicial proceedings. In particular, and in the process of reviewing the court decision.
The meaning of the settlement agreement is that the parties decide to abandon part of their claims. But the right of the parties to the litigation to reconcile in this way is not considered absolute. The court does not have the right to accept the plaintiff’s side’s refusal of the claimed claim or to accept a settlement if it is contrary to the law or infringes on the legitimate interests and rights of others.
Claimant replacement
Sometimes a plaintiff may be replaced in a civil proceeding. To understand why this happens, you should understand some of the intricacies of judicial terminology.
There are concepts such as the right and the wrong side of the process. The first is the holder of disputed rights or obligations. And an improper party is considered to be persons who, on the basis of the materials of the case, are excluded from the number of owners of disputed relations.
Therefore, if the court pursuant to Art. 36 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation established that the plaintiff (or defendant) is improper, then he has every right, without stopping the trial, to replace the original plaintiffs (defendants) with proper ones.
If the original plaintiff does not want to drop out of this trial, the appropriate one is notified by the court that he can participate as a third party with the right to present his own claims.
Some judicial subtleties
1. In the event that the original plaintiff does not give his consent to retire from the trial, and the proper one does not want to act as a new one, the case is considered without replacement. But at the same time, the court refuses the claim.
2. With the consent of the new plaintiff to enter the trial, the case continues with two plaintiffs. And depending on the circumstances, the court makes a decision that applies to the proper plaintiff. The initially declared party (plaintiff) is denied his claim.
3. In a situation where the improper plaintiff agrees to drop out of the trial, and the proper one enters into it, the case begins again.
As you see, the plaintiff has a huge number of rights in the lawsuit. You met only the main part. There are many more legal subtleties, but this is a topic for another discussion.