THE COURT’S ROLE IN PROVIDING PROCEDURAL ABUSES

The article examines certain issues of court participation in the process of proving and establishing facts of procedural abuse. Based on the concept of Yu. K. Osipov, associated with the identification of direct and indirect types of knowledge of legal facts by the court, the author compares the approaches to the cognitive activity of the court in establishing facts of procedural abuse that have been established in judicial practice. The author examines the mechanism for establishing easily identifiable facts of procedural abuse within the framework of their direct knowledge by the court. The author provided an overview of the current state of law enforcement activities in the indirect establishment by the court of difficultly identifiable facts of procedural abuses. The author draws attention to the fact that in the course of establishing easily identifiable facts of procedural abuse and facts of procedural abuse related to the implementation of illegal financial transactions, the courts are obliged to take an active position and strive to achieve the objective truth in the case. The author concludes that, contrary to the established doctrinal approach, according to which the modern model of Russian civil procedure is based solely on the operation of the principles of judicial leadership and formal (legal) truth, the establishment of facts of procedural abuses of certain types clearly demonstrates to us the functioning of the principles of procedural activity of the court and objective truth.