Bylinėjimosi išlaidų paskirstymas apeliacijos, kasacijos ir proceso atnaujinimo stadijose ir kai taisyklė "pralaimėjęs moka" netinka

LTŠiuo straipsniu autorius tęsia bylinėjimosi išlaidų atlyginimo civiliniame procese tyrimus. Straipsnyje analizuojami kai kurie bylinėjimosi išlaidų paskirstymo proceso šalims klausimai. Daugiausiai dėmesio skiriama bylinėjimosi išlaidų paskirstymui apeliacijos, kasacijos ir proceso atnaujinimo stadijose, ypatingojoje teisenoje, taip pat baigus bylą be teismo sprendimo dėl ginčo esmės. įvertinama nerūpestingo ir nesąžiningo naudojimosi procesinėmis teisėmis jtaka bylinėjimosi išlaidų atlyginimui. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Bylinėjimosi išlaidos; Procesinės teisės; Litigation costs; Procedural law.

ENIn the article separate questions of allocation of litigation costs in Lithuanian civil procedure are examined. Specifically author deals with two groups of issues: firstly, where on one hand application of the main costs shifting rule "loser pays" needs creative approach; secondly, where on the other exemptions to that rule are or should be made. Allocating litigation costs in stages of appeal, cassation and renewal of procedure the main indemnity rule is applicable. Author suggests that every separate stage must be assessed separately deciding who is to be conquered as a "losing party" and who is a "winning party". Principle "loser pays" (the theory of indemnity) does not fit when they deal with allocation of costs in special proceedings and in cases when litigation ceases without final decision on merits. In addition general principles of justice, rationality and fairness require take into account careless and unfair use of procedural rights, which in a long row of cases also mean deviation from the theory of indemnity. In author's opinion the main costs indemnification rule should be supplemented with elements form the cause theory, basing those supplements on assessment of carefulness and rationality of procedural behaviour of parties. Such approach enables to solve questions of allocation of costs in special proceedings and in cases when there is no final decision on merits. In situations when the wining party negligently or in course of abuse of her procedural rights causes or enlarges her own litigation costs or when the losing party contests the wining party's rights referring to the judicial precedent what was changed only in that specific litigation compensation for the winning party's costs may be mitigated or the wining party's claim for litigation costs may be set aside.In fact this means extensive application of the ideas of tortious liability regulation, which is provided for by the Paragraph 2 of Article 1.1 of the new Civil Code establishing subsidiary application of rules of the Civil Code to property relations that are governed by public law. [From the publication]