PECULIARITIES OF THE EXECUTION OF A COURT DECISION IN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS OF THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA AND UKRAINE: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

Abstract

The article is devoted to a comparative legal analysis of the current issues of the peculiarities of the execution of court decisions in the administrative justice of the Republic of Moldova and Ukraine. The main regulatory legal acts of Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova that regulate legal relations in the field of administrative justice, as well as scientific legal literature on this issue, are analyzed. Special attention is paid to the disclosure of the principle of bindingness of a court decision in the legislation of both countries. It is established that the administrative courts of Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova have significant similarities in their approaches to determining the grounds for appealing to the administrative court, their main common and distinctive features are identified. Additionally, it is established that the procedure for the execution of court decisions and the general provisions of judicial control in the Republic of Moldova are regulated by Chapter VI of Book Three of the Administrative Code of the Republic of Moldova. Instead, the procedure for the execution of individual administrative acts and administrative contracts is regulated by Section VII of Book Two of the Administrative Code of the Republic of Moldova. A comparative analysis of the mechanism of the “incentive fine” for non-compliance with court decisions, provided for in Art. 254 of the Administrative Code of the Republic of Moldova, and the imposition of a fine on the head of a subject of government authority when issuing a resolution to refuse to accept a report on the execution of a court decision, provided for in Part 3 of Art. 382-3 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine (hereinafter referred to as the CAS of Ukraine), was conducted. It was concluded that in Ukrainian legislation the mechanism for the application of fines is more specific and provides for a special stage of judicial control. It is concluded that the experience of the Republic of Moldova in appointing a temporary authorized executor deserves partial borrowing, considering Ukrainian legal realities and the need to ensure clear legal certainty in the field of forced execution of decisions of administrative courts, regulation of the terms of his work and the limits of competence. At the same time, the objective need for further scientific research on this issue is indicated.