ВСТАНОВЛЕННЯ ПРАВОНАСТУПНИЦТВА ЮРИДИЧНОЇ ОСОБИ – КРЕДИТОДАВЦЯ В КРЕДИТНИХ ВІДНОСИНАХ ПРИ ЗМІНІ НАЗВИ ТА ВИДІВ ДІЯЛЬНОСТІ: ПРОБЛЕМНІ ПИТАННЯ ПРАКТИКИ «ОНОВЛЕНОГО СКЛАДУ» ВЕРХОВНОГО СУДУ

The article is devoted to the analysis of modern judicial law-making through the example of a randomly-selective judicial act of the Supreme Court. The scientific publication provides a doctrinal analysis of the conditions of legal succession. It is noted that the change of legal entity name did not lead to a deformation of the structure of civil relations. In this case, the participant of the civil relation does not leave its composition. This does not necessitate the emergence of a new participant to which the respective rights and obligations of legal entity must be assigned. The considerable attention is paid to the legal status of bank. The justification is given that it is the participant in the relevant civil relations, regardless of the presence of its features of bank or financial institution has the right to claim under loan agreement for cash (credit) that was previously provided by bank or other financial institution to borrower and the due date for fulfillment of obligations to repay the loan that matured. Non-typical failures of the Supreme Court in applying the norms of Articles 104 and 512 of the Civil Code of Ukraine in the course of judicial proceedings are outlined, their causes are investigated