Teisėjo nešališkumas civiliniame procese

LTŠiame straipsnyje nagrinėjama teisėjo nešališkumo civiliniame procese problematika, analizuojant kodekse numatytus teisėjo nušalinimo pagrindus ir ieškant atsakymų į klausimą, kokios galėtų būti kitos abejonių teisėjo nešališkumu keliančios aplinkybės. Straipsnyje ne tik teoriškai gilinamasi į instituto sampratą bei esmę, bet ir nagrinėjamos jo praktinio pritaikomumo problemos, kai įstatymų numatytais atvejais teisėjas yra įpareigojamas byloje veikti aktyviai. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Teisėjas; Nešališkumas; Civilinis procesas; Nusišalinimas. Keywords: Judge; Impartiality; Civil process; Withdrawal.

ENThis article focuses on the examination of code regulations of grounds for judge’s removal from a case, especially scrutinizing Article 66 of the Civil Procedure Code. The necessity to analyse Article 66 rather than Article 65 derives from the legal technique chosen by the legislator – Article 65 is detailed and well-defined, therefore it raises less questions when it comes to invoking it in practice. Article 66, on the other hand, is way more open to interpretations, thus the unified practice must be sought in its application. For this purpose, the article presents a list of possible circumstances that might give a reasonable doubt about judge’s impartiality (e.g. subordination between a judge and one of the parties working for the same educational institution) and describes circumstances which cannot be used as a valid reason to remove judge from a particular case (e.g. distant connections between party and the judge such as growing up in neighbouring towns). Article also analyses practical problems that might occur when judge is obliged by law to act in case actively (for instance in family or consumer protection cases). It is absolutely critical to emphasize that judges should not act actively in cases only because of their type. They always have to make sure that there is a public interest in an examined case, otherwise they take a risk of being seen as “too active” and acting in favour of one of the parties. [From the publication]