Participating in the court session, in addition to the opposing party and the judge, you will see at least one more person who writes something all the time.
This is the secretary of the court session, and his job is to keep the record of the court session (PJC).
By ignorance, the participants in the lawsuit attachLittle importance to this procedural document and it is possible to say with certainty that 80-90% of them have not been seen in his eyes. Of course, such a disregard for acquaintance with the PTS is a consequence of legal illiteracy. Being involved in litigation, it is necessary to know and remember that the CPS is the most important document, in which, among other things, statements, petitions and explanations of the persons participating in the case and their representatives are indicated. And every word you say, as the American police say, "can be used against you in court." And both in the current court, and in the possible in the future.
In accordance with the proceduralLegislation, the CES is considered by the court as written evidence. Now imagine, for example, the situation that you rent an apartment belonging to you, but you do not inform the tax authority about this and do not pay taxes. And here in the course of some court session you "talk through", and information about who, when and for how much you rent an apartment are fixed in the PSZ. Do you think that such a PPS can be used as evidence against you already in the case of a tax offense? That's right, maybe.
Well, when everything is recorded correctly in the PSZ andExactly, but the secretary of the court session is also a person and nothing human is alien to him, including the risk of making mistakes. In order to have time to write down everything that happens in the court session, the secretary is almost always forced to simplify the wording, "throw out" part of the words from the speech of the participants in the process. As a result, it turns out that the PPC fixes not a direct speech of the participant in the process, but something very close to it. It happens that the meaning of the statements is distorted from this. Very often, the participants themselves are to blame for this, when they speak too quickly for them to be able to write down everything or muffle their thoughts. Of course, civil procedural legislation allows the court to use audio and other technical means to ensure the completeness of compilation of CPS, but in practice, especially in the provinces, they are used extremely rarely.
So what should you do if you found an error in reading it?
Article 231 of the Code of Civil ProcedureThe RF establishes that the persons participating in the case and their representatives have the right, within 5 days from the date of signing the PS, to submit in writing comments on the COR with indication of the inaccuracies committed in it or incompleteness thereof. Comments on the CAP are reviewed by the judge who signed it, presiding at the hearing. In case of agreement with the remarks, the judge certifies that they are correct, and if they disagree with them, he makes a reasoned determination about their complete or partial deviation. In both cases, comments are attached to the case.
In arbitration courts the situation is somewhat different. In accordance with Article 155 of the Code of Arbitration Procedure of the Russian Federation, audio recording during the court session is mandatory. Recording using audio recording is ongoing. Also written and written PZP. The persons participating in the case have the right to get acquainted with the audio record of the court session and the COR and to submit comments on the completeness and correctness of their compilation within a three-day period after the signing of the CPS. The material carriers carried by the person participating in the case, audio or video recording of the court session, may be attached to the remarks. On the adoption or rejection of comments on the PJC, the arbitral tribunal shall issue a ruling. Comments on the COR and the court's decision are attached to the CSP.
Regarding the maintenance of the CPS in court proceedingsOf the criminal case, the peculiarity here is that in the course of the court session the PJC can be made in parts, which, like the PCZ as a whole, are signed by the presiding judge and the secretary of the court session. At the request of the parties, they may be given the opportunity to review the parts Protocol As they are manufactured. Within 3 days from the day of acquaintance with the CPS, the parties can submit comments on it. Such remarks are considered by the presiding judge immediately. If necessary, the presiding officer may call the persons who submitted comments to clarify the content of the comments. Based on the results of consideration of the remarks, the presiding judge makes a decision to certify their correctness or to reject them. Comments on the COR and the decision of the chairman are attached to the record of the court session.
As can be seen, both in civil, in arbitration, and inCriminal proceedings, comments on the PIA brought by the participant of the process remain in the case materials, therefore, even if the judge rejects the observations, you will have a good argument in your favor.