The theory of formal truth in arbitration procedural law

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu14.2025.103

Abstract

The study of theories of truth from a methodological point of view is useful for both natural sciences and humanities, including law. This article formulates the theory of formal truth
based on the current judicial practice in the field of arbitration proceedings. The main characteristics
and content of the proposed theory of formal truth are investigated. The legal assessment of the application of this theory in the arbitration process is given, the methods and techniques used by the court to establish the circumstances of the case and the motives for the adoption of relevant judicial acts. The approaches to the assessment of the subject of the claim, the choice of a way to protect the violated right and the active role of the court. The general and special provisions of the law on the distribution of the burden of proof are
disclosed. The article defines the boundary between the legally permissible and the possible
practically active role of the court. At the same time, the criteria for the permissible role of the court may be: the framework of discretionary functions, in which the court has the right to independently determine the way to verify the oral and written arguments of the parties; by the established judicial practice in the relevant categories of cases; the discretion of the judge, taking into account the circumstances of a particular dispute and the need to fulfill the tasks of the proceedings. Highlights the importance of timely disclosure of relevant evidence and petitions, including falsification of evidence. It is concluded that the solution of this issue is directly in the procedural plane, but the legal consequences of such a statement affect the
substantive result. The influence of information technologies on the essential characteristics of the theory of formal truth in arbitration proceedings is analyzed.

Keywords:

theory of truth, theory of formal truth, procedural estoppel, abuse of law, disclosure of evidence, burden of proof, procedural risks, court decision, active role of the court, falsification of evidence

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
 

References

Библиография

Аносов, А. В. 2016. Информационно-правовые вопросы формирования электронного правосудия в Российской Федерации. Дис. … канд. юрид. наук, Институт государства и права Российской академии наук.

Афанасьев, С. Ф. 1998. Проблема истины в гражданском судопроизводстве. Дис. … канд. юрид. наук, Саратовская государственная академия права.

Бурдина, Е. В., С. В. Зуев. 2021. Электронное правосудие. М.: Рос. гос. ун-т правосудия.

Габов, А. В. 2005. «Проблемы применения категории «обычная хозяйственная деятельность» при регулировании сделок, в совершении которых имеется заинтересованность». Цивилистические записки: Межвузовский сборник научных трудов, 267–288. Екатеринбург: Институт частного права.

Гущин, В. З. 2011. «Принцип объективной истины в гражданском судопроизводстве». Современное право 10: 107–111.

Докучаева, Т. В. 2005. «Истина в гражданском процессе». Lex Russica (Русский закон) 4: 719–734.

Карапетов, А. Г., ред. 2022. Перемена лиц в обязательстве и ответственность за нарушение обязательства: комментарий к статьям 330–333, 380–381, 382–406.1 Гражданского кодекса РФ. М.: М-Логос.

Клеандров, М. И. 2022. Правосудие и справедливость. М.: Норма; Инфра-М.

Лаптев, В. А. 2015. «Решения судов в составе судебной практики: применение закона и принципа справедливости». Арбитражный и гражданский процесс 10: 28–33.

Лаптев, В. А. 2022. «Гражданско-правовое сообщество в системе управления корпорацией: задачи законодателя и реалии судебной практики». Вестник Арбитражного суда Московского округа 4: 46–57.

Лукьянова, И. Н. 2018. «Доказательства в гражданских делах в эпоху электронного правосудия». Вестник Воронежского государственного университета. Серия: Право 4: 130–136.

Молчанов, В. В. 2017. Основы теории доказательств в гражданском процессуальном праве. М.: Зерцало-М.

Момотов, В. В. 2021. «Искусственный интеллект в судопроизводстве: состояние, перспективы использования». Вестник Университета имени О. Е. Кутафина (МГЮА) 5 (81): 188–191.

Мохов, А. А. 2002. «Принцип судебной истины и проблемы его реализации в гражданском судопроизводстве России». Право и политика 12: 89–104.

Смолина, О. С. 2015. Арбитражный процесс: доказывание и доказательства по делам об оспаривании результатов налоговых проверок. М.: Норма; Инфра-М.

Толстой, Ю. К. 1959. К теории правоотношения. Л.: Изд-во Ленингр. ун-та.

Туманов, Д. А. 2021. «Нужен ли современному судопроизводству принцип объективной истины?» Вестник Университета имени О. Е. Кутафина (МГЮА) 12 (88): 28–40.

Цвык, В. А., И. В. Цвык. 2022. «Социальные проблемы развития и применения искусственного интеллекта». Вестник Российского университета дружбы народов. Сер.: Социология 1: 58–69.

Чуча, С. Ю., ред. 2017. Электронное правосудие. Электронный документооборот: науч.-практ. пособие. М.: Проспект.

Шишкин, С. А. 1997. Состязательность в гражданском и арбитражном судопроизводстве. М.: Городец.

Ярков, В. В. 2021. Арбитражный процесс: учебник. 8‑е изд., перераб. и доп. М.: Статут.

Bradley, F. H. 1883. The principles of logic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Habermas, J. 1973. Wahrheitstheorien. Festschrift fur W. Schulz. Pfullingen: Neske.

James, W. 1890. Principles of psychology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Joachim, H. H. 1906. The nature of truth. Eds S. Blackburn, K. Simmons. New York: Greenwood Press.

Moore, G. E. 1993. “Truth and falsity”. Selected writings. Ed. by T. Baldwin, 20–22. London; New York: Routledge.

Peirce, C. S. 1992. The essential Peirce. In 2 vols, vol. 1. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Peirce, C. S. 1999. The essential Peirce. In 2 vols, vol. 2. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Russell, B. 1903. The principles of mathematics. London: Allen and Unwin.

References

Afanasiev, S. F. 1998. The problem of truth in civil proceedings. PhD Thesis in Law, Saratovskaia gosudarstvennaia akademiia prava. (In Russian)

Anosov, A. V. 2016. Information and legal issues of the formation of electronic justice in the Russian Federation. PhD Thesis in Law, Institut gosudarstva i prava Rossiiskoi akademii nauk. (In Russian)

Bradley, F. H. 1883. The Principles of logic. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Burdina, E. V., S. V. Zuev. 2021. Electronic justice. Moscow, Rossiiskii gosudarstvennyi universitet pravosudiia Publ. (In Russian)

Chucha, S. Yu., ed. 2017. Electronic justice. Electronic document management: Scientific and practical manual. Moscow, Prospekt Publ. (In Russian)

Dokuchaeva, T. V. 2005. “Truth in civil proceedings”. Lex Russica (Russkii zakon) 4: 719–734. (In Russian)

Gabov, A. V. 2005. “Problems of applying the category ‘ordinary business activity’ when regulating interested party transactions”. Tsivilisticheskie zapiski: mezhvuzovskiш sbornik nauchnykh trudov, 267–288. Ekaterinburg, Institut chastnogo prava Publ. (In Russian)

Gushchin, V. Z. 2011. “The principle of objective truth in civil proceedings”. Sovremennoe pravo 10: 107–111. (In Russian)

Habermas, J. 1973. Wahrheitstheorien. Festschrift fur W. Schulz. Pfullingen, Neske.

James, W. 1890. Principles of psychology. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.

Joachim, H. H. 1906. The nature of truth. Eds S. Blackburn, K. Simmons. New York, Greenwood Press.

Karapetov, A. G., ed. 2022. Change of persons in an obligation and liability for violation of an obligation: Commentary on articles 330–333, 380–381, 382–406.1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Moscow, M-Logos Publ. (In Russian)

Kleandrov, M. I. 2022. Justice and fairness. Moscow, Norma Publ.; Infra-M Publ. (In Russian)

Laptev, V. A. 2015. “Court decisions as part of judicial practice: Application of the law and the principle of justice”. Arbitrazhnyi i grazhdanskii protsess 10: 28–33. (In Russian)

Laptev, V. A. 2022. “Civil legal community in the corporate management system: Tasks of the legislator and the realities of judicial practice”. Vestnik Arbitrazhnogo suda Moskovskogo okruga 4: 46–57. (In Russian)

Lukyanova, I. N. 2018. “Evidence in civil cases in the era of electronic justice”. Vestnik Voronezhskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriia: Pravo 4: 130–136. (In Russian)

Mokhov, A. A. 2002. “The principle of judicial truth and the problems of its implementation in civil proceedings in Russia”. Pravo i politika 12: 89–104. (In Russian)

Molchanov, V. V. 2017. Fundamentals of the theory of evidence in civil procedural law. Moscow, Zertsalo-M Publ. (In Russian)

Momotov, V. V. 2021. “Artificial intelligence in legal proceedings: Status, prospects for use”. Vestnik Universiteta imeni O. E. Kutafina (MGIuA) 5 (81): 188–191. (In Russian)

Moore, G. E. 1993. “Truth and falsity”. Selected writings. Ed. by T. Baldwin, 20–22. London; New York, Routledge.

Peirce, C. S. 1992. The essential Peirce. In 2 vols, vol. 1. Bloomington, Indiana University Press.

Peirce, C. S. 1999. The essential Peirce. In 2 vols, vol. 2. Bloomington, Indiana University Press.

Russell, B. 1903. The principles of mathematics. London, Allen and Unwin.

Shishkin, S. A. 1997. Adversarialism in civil and arbitration proceedings. Moscow, Gorodets Publ. (In Russian)

Smolina, O. S. 2015. Arbitration process: Proof and evidence in cases of challenging the results of tax audits. Moscow, Norma Publ.; Infra-M Publ. (In Russian)

Tolstoy, Yu. K. 1959. Towards a theory of legal relations. Leningrad, Izdatel’stvo Leningradskogo universiteta Publ. (In Russian)

Tsvyk, V. A., I. V. Tsvyk. 2022. “Social problems of the development and application of artificial intelligence”. Vestnik Rossiyskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriia: Sotsiologiia 1: 58–69. (In Russian)

Tumanov, D. A. 2021. “Does modern legal proceedings need the principle of objective truth?” Vestnik Universiteta imeni O. E. Kutafina (MGIuA) 12 (88): 28–40. (In Russian)

Yarkov, V. V. 2021. Arbitration process. 8th ed., rev. and suppl. Moscow, Statut Publ. (In Russian)

Downloads

Published

2025-04-22

How to Cite

Laptev, V. A., & Battakhov, P. P. (2025). The theory of formal truth in arbitration procedural law. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Law, 16(1), 30–47. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu14.2025.103

Issue

Vol. 16 No. 1 (2025)

Section

Public and Private Law: Applied Research

License

Articles of "Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Law" are open access distributed under the terms of the License Agreement with Saint Petersburg State University, which permits to the authors unrestricted distribution and self-archiving free of charge.