PROBLEMIC ASPECTS OF THE PARTICIPATION OF THE FORENSIC EXPERT IN THE ECONOMIC COURT PROCEEDINGS

Section Law: Theory and history of Economic Law and Process

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to study the problematic aspects of the participation of a forensic expert in the economic proceedings of Ukraine. The reliability of the results and conclusions obtained is provided by a combination of research methods at the general scientific and special levels. In particular, from the standpoint of the systemic-structural method, the authors clarified the specifics of the change in the status of an expert as one of the other participants in the trial after the reform of the economic procedural legislation. Using the formal-logical method, the author identifies the forms of expert participation in the business process and the mechanism for their implementation. Using the comparative legal method on examples of judicial practice, the content and correlation of the legal and procedural status of an expert in economic proceedings are revealed. It is argued that the connection, interdependence and mutual transitions of the subject link of economic proceedings of the form: expert—judicial examiner—expert-professional correspond to the categories general—special—single. The provision on the variable and periodic nature of acquiring the economic procedural status of an expert has been substantiated, the nature of the grounds for its acquisition has been classified into types of imperative, imperative blanket, dispositive, dispositive-blanket and forms of expert participation in the economic process according to the criteria of territoriality, the content of expert and procedural activities. It has been established that, in accordance with the Economic Procedural Code of Ukraine, an expert can be appointed by the court or attracted by a participant in the case, that is, act as a subject who can be entrusted with the direct examination, such persons should be considered as: a state forensic expert; private forensic expert; professional expert. It is proposed to consider it a general requirement for them to possess the special knowledge necessary to provide a reasoned and objective written opinion on the questions posed. A special requirement for forensic experts is their inclusion in the state Register of certified forensic experts. The provision on the variable nature of the acquisition of the procedural status of an expert on the initiative of other persons, which this person receives periodically and does not possess permanently—at the time of assignment (appointment or involvement) to him, to conduct and formalize the results of expert proceedings at the stages of pretrial investigation and judicial consideration of a specific economic case, has been substantiated. The article proves the provision on the dynamism of the requirements for the number of experts and the quality (class, experience, industry) of their special knowledge, which mainly depend on the type (primary, additional, repeated, commission, complex) and complexity of the examination of the case. It has been established that the mechanism for implementing the forms of participation of an expert in the economic process is of a binding nature, in which the expert acts as an obliged person regarding arrival at the court upon his summons on the basis of his own initiative or at the request of the participants in the case.

REFERENCES
1. Popovych I.M. Problemni pytannia pryznachennia ta provedennia sudovoi ekspertyzy v hospodarskomu sudochynstvi. Teoriia ta praktyka sudovoi ekspertyzy i kryminalistyky: zb. nauk. pr. 2019. No. 20. P. 190-206. https://doi.org/10.32353/khrife.2.2019.14 [in Ukrainian].
2. Zaiats O., Skrynkovskyi R. Problemni aspekty uchasti eksperta u tsyvilnomu sudochynstvi Ukrainy. Traektoriâ Nauki = Path of Science. 2019. Vol. 5. No. 9. P. 3001–3011. http://dx.doi.org/10.22178/pos.50-3 [in Ukrainian].
3. Vasyliev V.M. Sudova ekspertyza u tsyvilnomu ta hospodarskomu provadzhenni yak okrema forma zastosuvannia spetsialnykh znan. Teoriia ta praktyka sudovoi ekspertyzy i kryminalistyky: zb. nauk. pr. Pravo. 2020. Vol. 21. No. 1. P. 120-132. https://doi.org/10.32353/khrife.1.2020_08 [in Ukrainian].
4. Postanova Pivdenno-zakhidnoho apeliatsiinoho hospodarskoho sudu vid 18.03.2021 u spravi No. 916/3236/19. URL: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/95639519 [in Ukrainian].
5. Rishennia Hospodarskoho sudu m. Kyieva vid 24.09.2020 u spravi No. 910/12248/18. URL: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/92068780 [in Ukrainian].
6. Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu u skladi kolehii suddiv Kasatsiinoho hospodarskoho sudu vid 27.05.2021 u spravi No. 910/702/17. URL: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/97242611 [in Ukrainian].
7. Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu u skladi suddiv palaty dlia rozghliadu sprav shchodo zakhystu prav intelektualnoi vlasnosti, a takozh pov’iazanykh z antymonopolnym ta konkurentnym zakonodavstvom Kasatsiinoho hospodarskoho sudu vid 21.04.2021 u spravi No. 910/701/17. URL: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/96501275 [in Ukrainian].
8. Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu u skladi kolehii suddiv Kasatsiinoho hospodarskoho sudu vid 16.09.2019 u spravi No. 926/2275/17. URL: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/84284220 [in Ukrainian].
9. Reviakina T.O. Status sudovoho eksperta u hospodarskomu ta tsyvilnomu protsesakh: porivnialnyi analiz. Teoriia i praktyka sudovoi ekspertyzy i kryminalistyky: materialy III Vseukr. nauk.-prakt. konf. (m. Kyiv, 27 liut. 2020 roku). Kyiv-Mariupol, 2020. P. 252-256 [in Ukrainian].
10. Kirin R.S. Okremi problemy rehlamentatsii statusu eksperta u kryminalnomu protsesualnomu zakonodavstvi. Kryminalne sudochynstvo: suchasnyi stan ta perspektyvy rozvytku: materialy Vseukr. nauk.-prakt. konf. (Kyiv, 28 trav. 2021 r.). Kyiv: Nats. akad. vnutr. sprav, 2021. P. 124-127 [in Ukrainian].
11. Roberts P. Paradigms of forensic science and legal process: a critical diagnosis. Philosophical Transactions B. Bio logical Sciences. 2015. Vol. 370. Iss. 1674. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2014.0256
12. Howes L.M. "Sometimes I give up on the report and ring the scientist": Bridging the gap between what forensic scientists write and what police investigators read. Policing and Society. 2017. Vol. 27. Iss. 5. P. 541-559. https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2015.1089870
13. Hackman L. Communication, forensic science, and the law. WIREs Forensic Science. 2021. 3:e1396. https://doi.org/10.1002/wfs2.1396