Eenforcement procedure – a stage of the civil procedure or the independent process?

Pagal Lietuvos Respublikos civilinio proceso kodekso (CPK) 2 straipsnį civilinio proceso tikslai - ginti asmenų, kurių materialinės subjektinės teisės ar įstatymų saugomi interesai pažeisti ar ginčijami, interesus, tinkamai taikyti įstatymus teismui nagrinėjant civilines bylas, priimant sprendimus ir juos vykdant, taip pat kuo greičiau atkurti teisinę taiką tarp ginčo šalių, aiškinti ir plėtoti teisę. Šis gana trumpas proceso tikslų apibūdinimas leidžia teigti, kad civilinis procesas apima procesinius veiksmus nuo ginčo perdavimo teismui momento, atitinkamo sprendimo priėmimo ir šio sprendimo įvykdymo, t. y. svarbus ne tiek pats procesas, kiek jo rezultatas - apginti asmenų interesus ir atkurti teisinę taiką. Lietuvos civilinio proceso teisės moksle paplitusi nuomonė, kad sprendimų vykdymas yra sudedamoji civilinio proceso dalis, tiksliau kalbant - civilinio proceso stadija, ir tik pažintiniais tikslais nurodoma, kad yra ir kitų nuomonių. Taigi šiame straipsnyje aptariamos nusistovėjusiai nuomonei, kad vykdymo procesas yra civilinio proceso stadija, oponuojančios teorijos. Pažymėtina, kad taip siekiama labiau išplėsti akiratį moksliniu požiūriu, nors kai kurie klausimai gana svarbūs ir praktikai. Taigi šiame straipsnyje autorius aptaria labiausiai paplitusias mokslines nuomones apie vykdymo proceso prigimtį - vykdymo procesą kaip civilinio proceso stadiją ir vykdymo procesą kaip savarankišką teisės šaką. Be to, autorius bando pagrįsti Lietuvos Respublikos civilinio proceso kodekse įtvirtintą vykdymo proceso, kaip civilinio proceso stadijos, koncepciją.According to the Code on Civil Procedure of the Republic of Lithuania, the enforcement procedure is considered as a stage of the civil procedure. This is a classic and most popular opinion with respect to enforcement procedure. However, the science of law knows more opinions with regard to the concept of the enforcement procedure. The opinion that the enforcement procedure is a stage of the civil procedure has great number of supporters. Professor V. Mikelėnas, Professor S. Vėlyvis, Russian legal scientist M. S. Šakarian and others declare that the justice without the enforcement and factual restoration of infringed rights and interests can not exist and is not possible. This opinion is grounded by a statement that the justice can be reached only through the enforcement of respective court decision, but not just by the adoption of such court decision. The authors, who oppose to the above described classic opinion regarding the enforcement procedure, say that the enforcement procedure is not a part of the civil procedure. According to them, the enforcement of the court decisions does not fall under the competence of the courts; the enforcement of the court decisions is a subject matter of independent branch of law - the enforcement law. In fact, the main difference between above described opinions is the different approach to the enforcement procedure. According to the supporters of the first concept (the enforcement as the stage of civil procedure), the enforcement procedure coincides with the list of enforceable documents provided for in the Code of Civil Procedure. In opposite, the supporters of the second opinion (the enforcement as the separate branch of law) narrow the enforcement procedure down to the decisions, rulings, resolutions and orders of the court. Furthermore, in addition to the above described opinions regarding the enforcement procedure, there could be distinguished the third one, which states that the enforcement procedure is a part of the administrative law. According to Russian scientist J. F. Farchtdinov, the supporter of this opinion, the enforcement of the court decisions is a subject matter of the activities of the bailiffs, which belong to the system of administrative institutions. However,' the grounds of this opinion are closely related to the specificity of regulation of the Russian laws - in the Federation of Russia the bailiffs, who are vested with the authorities to enforce the court decisions, belong to the system of administrative (executive) institutions