UNFAIR USE OF YOUR PROCEDURAL RIGHTS ON THE EXAMPLE OF THE USE OF «RIGHT TO EVIL» AND «VENIRE CONTRA FACTUM PROPRIUM» (BASED ON THE MATERIALS OF NATIONAL COURT PRACTICE)

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to establish the content of the unfair use of one's procedural rights on the example of the use of the "right to evil" and "venire contra factum proprium". The authors found that the actions of the debtor in the obligation are characterized as unfair and are understood as abuse of rights, provided that the initiation of the dispute is directed by the plaintiff to prevent foreclosure on the debtor's property. Based on the analysis of judicial practice, the authors found that the proper exercise of procedural rights is the exercise of rights by a person in conditions of refraining from actions that could violate the rights of others, cause harm to the environment or cultural heritage. The authors emphasized that private law tools for the protection of subjective private rights should not be used by participants in civil transactions in order to avoid the payment of debt (funds, losses, damage) or the execution of a court decision on the collection of debt (funds, losses, damage) force. The authors found that the abuse of the right and the use of private law tools for the protection of the subjective rights of a person contrary to its purpose are: the use by the person (persons) of the “right to evil”; the presence of a causal relationship between the abuse of the right and negative consequences. Consequently, other subjects, whose rights are directly related to the rights of a person who abuses the procedural rights granted to him for protection, puts them in such a state that he is not only unable to satisfy their interests, but generally deprives them of the opportunity to exercise them. The authors note that the abuse of procedural rights occurs with awareness of the content of such activity and its results. The authors concluded that the construction of national judicial practice in Ukraine is characterized by the application of the doctrine of "venire contra factum proprium" (prohibition of contradictory behavior). The obvious need for the formation of a single law enforcement practice on the application of paragraph 6 of Article 3 of the Civil Code of Ukraine and the doctrine of "venire contra factum proprium" (prohibition of contradictory behavior) in disputes about the invalidity of the contract, to ensure a reasonable premise, has been established. the decision is necessary to ensure the development of law and the formation of a unified law enforcement practice.