Abstract: The article reveals the process of formation of administrative judicial law in the Russian Federation. This process is inextricably connected with the realization of the constitutional provision on administrative legal proceedings as one of the forms of realization of judicial authority. In this context, the recodification of the current procedural legislation and the adoption of the Administrative Procedure Rules in 2005 were among the most important conditions of the formation of administrative judicial law. The author concludes that the adoption of the Administrative Procedure Rules leads to the establishment of a new paradigm of administrative justice in Russia, to the formation of independent administrative legal proceedings. The author considers the problem of the administrative judicial law system as a forming branch of law. The author defines the administrative judicial law structuring criteria. The author concludes about the importance of the Administrative Procedure Rules which had legitimated the administrative judicial law fundamentals, corresponding with the standards of the rule-of-law state. The research methodology is based on the recent achievements in epistemology. The author applies general philosophical and theoretical methods (dialectics, the system method, analysis, synthesis, analogy, deduction, observation and modeling), traditional methods of jurisprudence (formal-logical), and the methods of special sociological research (statistical, expert assessments, etc.). The author concludes that at present, in order to establish the administrative justice institution, many things should be done, particularly, it is necessary to improve the quality of various administrative and procedural means of adjudication of cases. The author states the necessity to improve the procedural regulation of adjudication of administrative cases. 

Keywords: decision, adjudication, procedure, process, Constitution, justice, court, proceedings, power, law

References:
Sokolov T.V. Konstitutsionnoe sudoproizvodstvo – mekhanizm realizatsii sudebnoy vlasti?!. // Pravo i politika. 2014. ¹ 3. C. 313 - 325. DOI: 10.7256/1811-9018.2014.3.11168.
Vitruk N.V. Konstitutsionnoe pravosudie. Sudebno-konstitutsionnoe pravo i protsess. M., 2012. S. 20-22.
Andriyanov V.N. Sushchnost' i printsipy administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva: uzakonennaya model' // Izvestiya IGEA. 2015. ¹ 3. S. 519-525.
Kodeks administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Elektronnyy resurs]. – URL: Consultant.ru›document/cons_doc_LAW_176147/ (data obrashcheniya 11.09.2016).
Ovsepyan Zh.I. Kodeks administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva kak rubezhnyy etap v istorii sudebnoy i administrativnoy reform v Rossii // Vestnik yuridicheskogo fakul'teta Yuzhnogo federal'nogo universiteta. 2015. ¹ 2. S. 8-19.
Zelentsov A.B. Administrativnoe sudebnoe pravo: kontseptual'nye problemy formirovaniya. M., Yurist. 2015. S. 39-46.
Starilov Yu.N. Kodeks administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva Rossiyskoy Federatsii – nadlezhashchaya osnova dlya razvitiya administrativno-protsessual'noy formy i formirovaniya novogo administrativnogo protsessual'nogo prava // Zhurnal administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva. 2016. ¹ 1. S. 29-39.
Zelentsov A.B. Administrativnaya yustitsiya (sudebnoe administrativnoe pravo): v skhemakh i s kommentariyami: Uchebnoe posobie. M., 2014. S. 41–55.
Arbitrazhnyy protsessual'nyy kodeks Rossiyskoy Federatsii: fed. zakon ot 24.07.2002 ¹ 95-FZ (red. ot 23.06.2016) (s izm. i dop., vstup. v silu s 01.09.2016) // SPS Konsul'tant Plyus.
Vystuplenie Vladimira Putina na VIII Vserossiyskom s'ezde sudey 18 dekabrya 2012. Dokumenty VIII Vserossiyskiy s'ezd sudey [Elektronnyy resurs]. – URL: http://pravo.ru/doc/view/291/ (data obrashcheniya 08.09.2016).
Konstitutsiya Rossiyskoy Federatsii. 2016 god, deystvuyushchaya redaktsiya. [Elektronnyy resurs]. – URL: http://www.constitution.ru/10003000/10003000-9.htm (data obrashcheniya 08.09.2016).
Korkunov N.M. Russkoe gosudarstvennoe pravo. SPb., 1889. S. 78.
Starilov Yu.N. Administrativnaya yustitsiya. Teoriya, istoriya, perspektivy. M., Norma, 2001. S. 80.
Sokolov T.V. Sushchnost' konstitutsionnogo sudoproizvodstva v kontekste doktriny sudebnogo prava // Politika i Obshchestvo. 2014. ¹ 2. C. 206 - 219. DOI: 10.7256/1812-8696.2014.2.11171.

References (transliteration):
Sokolov T.V. Konstitutsionnoe sudoproizvodstvo – mekhanizm realizatsii sudebnoy vlasti?!. // Pravo i politika. 2014. ¹ 3. C. 313 - 325. DOI: 10.7256/1811-9018.2014.3.11168.
Vitruk N.V. Konstitutsionnoe pravosudie. Sudebno-konstitutsionnoe pravo i protsess. M., 2012. S. 20-22.
Andriyanov V.N. Sushchnost' i printsipy administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva: uzakonennaya model' // Izvestiya IGEA. 2015. ¹ 3. S. 519-525.
Kodeks administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Elektronnyy resurs]. – URL: Consultant.ru›document/cons_doc_LAW_176147/ (data obrashcheniya 11.09.2016).
Ovsepyan Zh.I. Kodeks administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva kak rubezhnyy etap v istorii sudebnoy i administrativnoy reform v Rossii // Vestnik yuridicheskogo fakul'teta Yuzhnogo federal'nogo universiteta. 2015. ¹ 2. S. 8-19.
Zelentsov A.B. Administrativnoe sudebnoe pravo: kontseptual'nye problemy formirovaniya. M., Yurist. 2015. S. 39-46.
Starilov Yu.N. Kodeks administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva Rossiyskoy Federatsii – nadlezhashchaya osnova dlya razvitiya administrativno-protsessual'noy formy i formirovaniya novogo administrativnogo protsessual'nogo prava // Zhurnal administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva. 2016. ¹ 1. S. 29-39.
Zelentsov A.B. Administrativnaya yustitsiya (sudebnoe administrativnoe pravo): v skhemakh i s kommentariyami: Uchebnoe posobie. M., 2014. S. 41–55.
Arbitrazhnyy protsessual'nyy kodeks Rossiyskoy Federatsii: fed. zakon ot 24.07.2002 ¹ 95-FZ (red. ot 23.06.2016) (s izm. i dop., vstup. v silu s 01.09.2016) // SPS Konsul'tant Plyus.
Vystuplenie Vladimira Putina na VIII Vserossiyskom s'ezde sudey 18 dekabrya 2012. Dokumenty VIII Vserossiyskiy s'ezd sudey [Elektronnyy resurs]. – URL: http://pravo.ru/doc/view/291/ (data obrashcheniya 08.09.2016).
Konstitutsiya Rossiyskoy Federatsii. 2016 god, deystvuyushchaya redaktsiya. [Elektronnyy resurs]. – URL: http://www.constitution.ru/10003000/10003000-9.htm (data obrashcheniya 08.09.2016).
Korkunov N.M. Russkoe gosudarstvennoe pravo. SPb., 1889. S. 78.
Starilov Yu.N. Administrativnaya yustitsiya. Teoriya, istoriya, perspektivy. M., Norma, 2001. S. 80.
Sokolov T.V. Sushchnost' konstitutsionnogo sudoproizvodstva v kontekste doktriny sudebnogo prava // Politika i Obshchestvo. 2014. ¹ 2. C. 206 - 219. DOI: 10.7256/1812-8696.2014.2.11171.

Abstract: The research subject is the comparative-legal analysis of the structure, the purposes, and the subjects of legal regulation, the principles of the Code of administrative legal proceedings of the Russian Federation and the standard Euro-American code of administrative jurisdiction incorporating the foundations of administrative jurisdiction regardless of legal systems (Continental European and Latin-American). In Russia, since the soviet period, there exists the institution of administrative jurisdiction implemented mainly by virtue of the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation; since 15 September 2015, the Code of administrative legal proceedings of the Russian Federation is functioning, as well as the institution of administrative jurisdiction on the codified basis. In most modern democratic states the legislative provisions, related to the peculiarities of consideration of administrative cases through judicial (quasi-judicial) proceedings, are functioning. The study contains the author’s translation of the Euro-American standard code of administrative jurisdiction and the comparative-legal analysis of the institution of administrative jurisdiction, which is important for the improvement of administrative legal proceedings in the Russian Federation, including the possibility of normative consolidation of responsibility of the state and administrative bodies (executive bodies) and their officials for the violation of citizens’ rights in the sphere of public administration. The research methodology comprises the modern achievements in epistemology. The author applies theoretical and general philosophical methods (dialectics, the system method, analysis synthesis, analogy deduction, observation, modeling), traditional legal methods (formal logical), and the methods of special sociological research (statistical, expert assessments, etc.), and the comparative method. The author carries out the comparative analysis of the content, the structure and the register of administrative cases and principles of the standard Euro-American code of administrative jurisdiction and the code of administrative legal proceedings of the Russian Federation. The author concludes that it is necessary to use particular elements of the administrative jurisdiction model, contained in the Euro-American standard code of administrative jurisdiction, for the revival and development of effective judicial protection of the violated or contested rights, freedoms and interests of citizens and organizations resulting from administrative and other legal relationship in the modern Russian state. The novelty of the study consists in the conclusion about the possibility of legal impact of the Euro-American standard code on the improvement of the institution of administrative jurisdiction in the Russian Federation. 

Keywords: transparency, judicial control, state officials, administrative cases, judicial protection of citizens, administrative legal proceedings, administrative proceedings, comparative administrative law, administrative jurisdiction, administrative justice

References:
Lapina M.A. Administrativnaya yurisdiktsiya v sisteme administrativnogo protsessa: monografiya. M.: Finansovyy universitet, 2013. 140 s.
"Kodeks administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva Rossiyskoy Federatsii" ot 08.03.2015 ¹ 21-FZ (red. ot 30.12.2015) // Ofitsial'nyy internet-portal pravovoy informatsii http://www.pravo.gov.ru, 09.03.2015.
Lapina M.A. Ob'edinennaya kontseptsiya sistemy administrativnogo protsessa // Yuridicheskiy mir. 2012. ¹3. S. 38-43.
Avrutin Yu.E. Problemy zakonodatel'noy modernizatsii mekhanizma administrativno-pravovogo regulirovaniya v kontekste obespecheniya nadlezhashchego publichnogo upravleniya // Administrativnoe pravo i protsess. 2015. ¹ 8 S. 7-14.
"Khartiya Evropeyskogo Soyuza ob osnovnykh pravakh" (2007/S 303/01) [rus., angl.] (Vmeste s "Raz'yasneniyami..." (2007/S 303/02)) (Prinyata v g. Strasburge 12.12.2007) // Khartiya na russkom yazyke podgotovlena dlya publikatsii v sistemakh Konsul'tantPlyus. Khartiya na angliyskom yazyke opublikovana ne byla.
"Konventsiya o zashchite prav cheloveka i osnovnykh svobod" (ETS N 5) (Zaklyuchena v g. Rime 04.11.1950) (red. ot 13.05.2004) // V dannom vide dokument opublikovan ne byl. Tekst redaktsii ot 11.05.1994 sm.: Byulleten' mezhdunarodnykh dogovorov. 2001. ¹ 3. S. 3-44.
Solov'ev A.A. Frantsuzskaya model' administrativnoy yustitsii: Monografiya / Kafedra «Administrativnoe i informatsionnoe pravo» Finansovogo universiteta pri Pravitel'stve Rossiyskoy Federatsii / Predisl. d.yu.n., prof. M.A. Lapinoy. – M., 2014. – 242 s.http://www.fa.ru/chair/pravoia/research/publications/Documents
Décret ¹ 2000-389 du 4 mai 2000 relatif à la partie Réglementaire du code de justice administrative (Décrets en Conseil d'Etat) // Journal officiel de la République Française. – 07.05.2000. – ¹ 107. – P. 6907.–Texte ¹ 7. http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000398940&dateTexte=&categorieLien=id.
Ordonnance ¹ 2000-387 du 4 mai 2000 relative à la partie Législative du code de justice administrative // Journal officiel de la République Française. – 07.05.2000. – P. 06904. http://admi.net/jo/20000507/JUSX0000016R.html.
Euro-American model code of administrative jurisdiction/ organizado por Ricardo Perlingeiro e Karl-Peter Sommermann. – Niterói; Editora da UFF, 2014.-138 p.
Ogneva K.O., Opalev R.O. Ob osnovnykh novellakh Kodeksa administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva Rossiyskoy Federatsii // Sud'ya. 2015. ¹ 6. S. 4-12.

References (transliteration):
Lapina M.A. Administrativnaya yurisdiktsiya v sisteme administrativnogo protsessa: monografiya. M.: Finansovyy universitet, 2013. 140 s.
"Kodeks administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva Rossiyskoy Federatsii" ot 08.03.2015 ¹ 21-FZ (red. ot 30.12.2015) // Ofitsial'nyy internet-portal pravovoy informatsii http://www.pravo.gov.ru, 09.03.2015.
Lapina M.A. Ob'edinennaya kontseptsiya sistemy administrativnogo protsessa // Yuridicheskiy mir. 2012. ¹3. S. 38-43.
Avrutin Yu.E. Problemy zakonodatel'noy modernizatsii mekhanizma administrativno-pravovogo regulirovaniya v kontekste obespecheniya nadlezhashchego publichnogo upravleniya // Administrativnoe pravo i protsess. 2015. ¹ 8 S. 7-14.
"Khartiya Evropeyskogo Soyuza ob osnovnykh pravakh" (2007/S 303/01) [rus., angl.] (Vmeste s "Raz'yasneniyami..." (2007/S 303/02)) (Prinyata v g. Strasburge 12.12.2007) // Khartiya na russkom yazyke podgotovlena dlya publikatsii v sistemakh Konsul'tantPlyus. Khartiya na angliyskom yazyke opublikovana ne byla.
"Konventsiya o zashchite prav cheloveka i osnovnykh svobod" (ETS N 5) (Zaklyuchena v g. Rime 04.11.1950) (red. ot 13.05.2004) // V dannom vide dokument opublikovan ne byl. Tekst redaktsii ot 11.05.1994 sm.: Byulleten' mezhdunarodnykh dogovorov. 2001. ¹ 3. S. 3-44.
Solov'ev A.A. Frantsuzskaya model' administrativnoy yustitsii: Monografiya / Kafedra «Administrativnoe i informatsionnoe pravo» Finansovogo universiteta pri Pravitel'stve Rossiyskoy Federatsii / Predisl. d.yu.n., prof. M.A. Lapinoy. – M., 2014. – 242 s.http://www.fa.ru/chair/pravoia/research/publications/Documents
Décret ¹ 2000-389 du 4 mai 2000 relatif à la partie Réglementaire du code de justice administrative (Décrets en Conseil d'Etat) // Journal officiel de la République Française. – 07.05.2000. – ¹ 107. – P. 6907.–Texte ¹ 7. http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000398940&dateTexte=&categorieLien=id.
Ordonnance ¹ 2000-387 du 4 mai 2000 relative à la partie Législative du code de justice administrative // Journal officiel de la République Française. – 07.05.2000. – P. 06904. http://admi.net/jo/20000507/JUSX0000016R.html.
Euro-American model code of administrative jurisdiction/ organizado por Ricardo Perlingeiro e Karl-Peter Sommermann. – Niterói; Editora da UFF, 2014.-138 p.
Ogneva K.O., Opalev R.O. Ob osnovnykh novellakh Kodeksa administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva Rossiyskoy Federatsii // Sud'ya. 2015. ¹ 6. S. 4-12.

Abstract: The research subject is the range of general questions of the prosecutor’s legal status as a participant of administrative proceedings, regulated by the recently adopted Code of Administrative Code Proceedings of the Russian Federation.  The author compares the Code’s provisions with the existing Civil Procedural Code of the Russian Federation, emphasizes the positive sides of the novels and criticizes the shortcomings of legal regulation of the issues under consideration, offers the ways to improve legal norms. The author applies the comparative-legal method to compare the provisions of the legislation, regulating administrative and civil proceedings. The author defines the advantages of the novels, added to the legal status of the prosecutor, involved in administrative proceedings, and draws attention to the particular drawbacks in procedural legislation formulae, offering the possible ways of their improvement. This research is one of the first scientific works, devoted to the legal status of the prosecutor, involved in administrative proceedings. 

Keywords: administrative bill of complaint, administrative proceedings, administrative case, prosecutor's decision, protection of rights of citizens, category of cases, general public, prosecutor, public interest, general jurisdiction court

References:
SZ RF. – 2015. – ¹ 10. – St. 1391 (s posled. izmeneniyami).
SZ RF. – 2014. – ¹ 34. – St. 4398.
SZ RF. – 2002. – ¹ 1 (ch. 1). – St. 1 (s posled. izmeneniyami).
SZ RF. – 2002. – ¹ 30. – St. 3012 (s posled. izmeneniyami).
SZ RF. – 2002. – ¹ 46. – St. 4532 (s posled. izmeneniyami).
Sakhnova T.V. Dostizhimo li edinstvo tsivilisticheskogo protsessa? (v kontekste kontseptsii edinogo GPK RF i Kodeksa administrativnogo sudo-proizvodstva) // Arbitrazhnyy i grazhdanskiy protsess. – 2015. – ¹ 4. – S. 3 – 10
Serkov P.P. Aktual'nye voprosy sovershenstvovaniya administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva v Rossiyskoy Federatsii // Administrativnoe pravo i protsess. – 2015. – ¹ 2. – S. 29 – 33 i dr.
SZ RF. – 1995. – ¹ 47. – St. 4472 (s posled. izmeneniyami).
Nasonov Yu.G., Vyskub V.S. O nedostatkakh pravovogo regulirovaniya uchastiya prokurora v administrativnom sudoproizvodstve // Vestnik Akademii General'noy prokuratury Rossiyskoy Federatsii. – 2015. – ¹ 5. – S. 60-66.

References (transliteration):
SZ RF. – 2015. – ¹ 10. – St. 1391 (s posled. izmeneniyami).
SZ RF. – 2014. – ¹ 34. – St. 4398.
SZ RF. – 2002. – ¹ 1 (ch. 1). – St. 1 (s posled. izmeneniyami).
SZ RF. – 2002. – ¹ 30. – St. 3012 (s posled. izmeneniyami).
SZ RF. – 2002. – ¹ 46. – St. 4532 (s posled. izmeneniyami).
Sakhnova T.V. Dostizhimo li edinstvo tsivilisticheskogo protsessa? (v kontekste kontseptsii edinogo GPK RF i Kodeksa administrativnogo sudo-proizvodstva) // Arbitrazhnyy i grazhdanskiy protsess. – 2015. – ¹ 4. – S. 3 – 10
Serkov P.P. Aktual'nye voprosy sovershenstvovaniya administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva v Rossiyskoy Federatsii // Administrativnoe pravo i protsess. – 2015. – ¹ 2. – S. 29 – 33 i dr.
SZ RF. – 1995. – ¹ 47. – St. 4472 (s posled. izmeneniyami).
Nasonov Yu.G., Vyskub V.S. O nedostatkakh pravovogo regulirovaniya uchastiya prokurora v administrativnom sudoproizvodstve // Vestnik Akademii General'noy prokuratury Rossiyskoy Federatsii. – 2015. – ¹ 5. – S. 60-66.

Abstract: One of the key moments of the article is the fact that tribunals are a special alternative to the traditional way of judicial control. The reform of administrative review mechanisms and the system of tribunals in England came into effect on November 3, 2008; this article considers the structure and the composition of this reformed system. Tribunals oversight remains the important guarantee of regulation and limitation of their functioning. The author shows the discussion of the peculiarities which can be implemented by any controlling authority. The methodology of the research comprises the general scientific methods of cognition including the systems analysis, the complex approach, the comparative-legal, formal-logical, system-structural, formal-legal and legal-technical methods. The author concludes that the chief importance of these developments is that the Tribunals Service doesn't depend anymore on the related department in the questions of resources and staff. Cooperation between the controlling Executive body of the Tribunals Service and the tribunals of the judicial system has led to the expansion of the spectrum of service provision to the users of tribunals. Possibly the most important aspect of the tribunal reforms is that tribunal decisions are no longer viewed as second-rate or weak judicial decisions. The combined function of the Upper Tribunal puts it in a difficult situation in England. Formally its authoruty is limited to the appeals related to the legality of the decision, but at the same time it has the same authorities as the first-tier tribunal; this situation leads to the overlay of ideas and notions in the system. 

Keywords: appeal, first-tier tribunals, upper tribunals, merits review, administrative tribunals, judicial review, legality, reasoning, finality, reform

References:
Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement. Act 2007. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2007/
Transforming Tribunals. S. 28.
Statistika uslug tribunalov za noyabr'2010g. http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/ docs/tribunals-stats-q2-2010-11.pdf
Carnwath. Some Jottings on Administrative Justice : The Future of Administrative Justice Symposium. Toronto. 2008. http://www.law.utoronto.ca/documents/conferences/adminjustice08
Wade & Forsyth Administrative Law. S. 781.
Carnwath Tribunals Judiciary : 4th International Conference on Administrative Justice Without Borders-Developments in the United Kingdom. Toronto, 2007. S. 8.
Hale Administrative Justice and Tribunals Council: Annual Report. 2009/2010. S. 6.
Carnwarth Tribunal Reform in the UK. 2008. S. 7.

References (transliteration):
Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement. Act 2007. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2007/
Transforming Tribunals. S. 28.
Statistika uslug tribunalov za noyabr'2010g. http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/ docs/tribunals-stats-q2-2010-11.pdf
Carnwath. Some Jottings on Administrative Justice : The Future of Administrative Justice Symposium. Toronto. 2008. http://www.law.utoronto.ca/documents/conferences/adminjustice08
Wade & Forsyth Administrative Law. S. 781.
Carnwath Tribunals Judiciary : 4th International Conference on Administrative Justice Without Borders-Developments in the United Kingdom. Toronto, 2007. S. 8.
Hale Administrative Justice and Tribunals Council: Annual Report. 2009/2010. S. 6.
Carnwarth Tribunal Reform in the UK. 2008. S. 7.

Abstract: In Russia the problem of implementation of acts of constitutional legal proceedings was raised before the adoption of the Constitution of the Russian Federation in 1992, when the Republic of Tatarstan hadn't implement the Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of March 13, 1992, N P-RZ-I. It is possible to give many examples of full and timely implementation of decisions of the constitutional justice, but there are also the facts of ignoring, unjustified procrastination of implementation, and attempts to overcome their legal effect by means of readoption of regulations similar to those recognized unconstitutional. The author analyzes the reasons of non-fulfulment of acts of the constitutional control and offers various solutions of this problem. The author considers the concept and legal nature of legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, their correlation with the decisions of the Constitutional Court, the lack of an accurately formed mechanism of their implementation in the law-making and law-enforcement practice. The author studies different types of responsibility for non-fulfilment of decisions of the constitutional justice and suggests to establish preliminary constitutional control and administrative responsibility. Thus the author studies foreign experience of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kosovo, the Albanian Republic and Germany. In the conclusion the author offers the ways of improvement of Russian legislation, including the adoption of law on normative legal acts in the Russian Federation.The research is based on the scientific methods, such as the methods of analysis and comparison, which help to define the similarities and differences between the rules of law and the decisions of the Constitutional Justice and to formulate particular theoretical and practical conclusions and suggestions, necessary for the further development of Russian legal system.

Keywords: improvement of the legislation, rule of law, constitutional control, constitutional justice, constitutional court, judgments, Legal position, constitutional law, constitution, constitutional legal proceeding

References:
Aleksandrova M.A. Puti razresheniya problemy neispolneniya aktov Konstitutsionnogo Suda RF//Rossiyskiy sud'ya.-¹11, 2014.-S. 35-39.
Burmistrov A.S. Yuridicheskaya sila i mekhanizm realizatsii resheniy konstitutsionnykh (ustavnykh) sudov v Rossii // Gosudarstvennaya vlast' i mestnoe samoupravlenie.-2011.-N 4.-S. 10-14.
Vitruk N.V. Forum: Ispolnenie resheniy konstitutsionnykh sudov // Konstitutsionnoe pravo: Vostochnoevropeyskoe obozrenie.-M., 2002.-N 3 (40).-S. 41.
Gadzhiev G.A. Metodologicheskie problemy "pretsedentnoy revolyutsii" v Rossii // Zhurnal konstitutsionnogo pravosudiya. 2013. N 4. S. 7-8.
Gavryusov Yu.V. Problema ispolneniya resheniy Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii i konstitutsionnykh (ustavnykh) sudov sub'ektov Rossiyskoy Federatsii// Problemy ispolneniya federal'nymi organami gosudarstvennoy vlasti i organami gosudarstvennoy vlasti sub'ektov Rossiyskoy Federatsii resheniy Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii i konstitutsionnykh (ustavnykh) sudov sub'ektov Rossiyskoy Federatsii: Materialy Vseros. soveshchaniya, Moskva, 22 marta 2001 g. / Pod red. M.A. Mityukova, C.B. Kabysheva, V.K. Bobrovoy, S.E. Andreeva.-M.: Formula prava, 2001.-S. 226-227.
Guseynova D.G.-R., Pirbudagova D.Sh. K probleme ispolneniya resheniy konstitutsionnykh (ustavnykh) sudov sub'ektov Rossiyskoy Federatsii // Gosudarstvennaya vlast' i mestnoe samoupravlenie.-2007.-N 9.
Zor'kin V.D. Konstitutsionnaya yustitsiya stran novoy demokratii v usloviyakh sovremennykh vyzovov. / V.D. Zor'kin. // Aktual'nye problemy teorii i praktiki konstitutsionnogo sudoproizvodstva (vypusk V). Kazan', 2010.-S. 21-23.
Kokotov A.N. Ispolnenie resheniy Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii // Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava.-2013.-N 5.-S. 90-101.
Kryazhkov V.A. Konstitutsionnaya kul'tura v zerkale pravosudiya Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii // Zhurnal konstitutsionnogo pravosudiya.-2008.-N 3.-S. 8.
Lazarev L. Stat'ya: Ispolnenie resheniy Konstitutsionnogo Suda RF // Rossiyskaya yustitsiya.-N 9.-2002. — S. 19.
Mokoseeva M.A. // Prichiny neispolneniya resheniy regional'nykh organov konstitutsionnogo kontrolya. Biznes v zakone. ¹ 5. S. 115-118.
Ovsepyan Zh.I. O vzaimodeystvii organov gosudarstvennoy vlasti RF v sfere ispolneniya resheniy, prinimaemykh Konstitutsionnym Sudom Rossiyskoy Federatsii i konstitutsionnymi (ustavnymi) sudami sub'ektov Rossiyskoy Federatsii // Problemy ispolneniya federal'nymi organami gosudarstvennoy vlasti i organami gosudarstvennoy vlasti sub'ektov Rossiyskoy Federatsii resheniy Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii i konstitutsionnykh (ustavnykh) sudov sub'ektov Rossiyskoy Federatsii. Materialy Vserossiyskogo soveshchaniya (Moskva, 22 marta 2001 g.) / Pod red. M.A. Mityukova, S.V. Kabysheva, V.K. Bobrovoy i S.E. Andreeva.-M., 2001.-S. 149-158.

References (transliteration):
Aleksandrova M.A. Puti razresheniya problemy neispolneniya aktov Konstitutsionnogo Suda RF//Rossiyskiy sud'ya.-¹11, 2014.-S. 35-39.
Burmistrov A.S. Yuridicheskaya sila i mekhanizm realizatsii resheniy konstitutsionnykh (ustavnykh) sudov v Rossii // Gosudarstvennaya vlast' i mestnoe samoupravlenie.-2011.-N 4.-S. 10-14.
Vitruk N.V. Forum: Ispolnenie resheniy konstitutsionnykh sudov // Konstitutsionnoe pravo: Vostochnoevropeyskoe obozrenie.-M., 2002.-N 3 (40).-S. 41.
Gadzhiev G.A. Metodologicheskie problemy "pretsedentnoy revolyutsii" v Rossii // Zhurnal konstitutsionnogo pravosudiya. 2013. N 4. S. 7-8.
Gavryusov Yu.V. Problema ispolneniya resheniy Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii i konstitutsionnykh (ustavnykh) sudov sub'ektov Rossiyskoy Federatsii// Problemy ispolneniya federal'nymi organami gosudarstvennoy vlasti i organami gosudarstvennoy vlasti sub'ektov Rossiyskoy Federatsii resheniy Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii i konstitutsionnykh (ustavnykh) sudov sub'ektov Rossiyskoy Federatsii: Materialy Vseros. soveshchaniya, Moskva, 22 marta 2001 g. / Pod red. M.A. Mityukova, C.B. Kabysheva, V.K. Bobrovoy, S.E. Andreeva.-M.: Formula prava, 2001.-S. 226-227.
Guseynova D.G.-R., Pirbudagova D.Sh. K probleme ispolneniya resheniy konstitutsionnykh (ustavnykh) sudov sub'ektov Rossiyskoy Federatsii // Gosudarstvennaya vlast' i mestnoe samoupravlenie.-2007.-N 9.
Zor'kin V.D. Konstitutsionnaya yustitsiya stran novoy demokratii v usloviyakh sovremennykh vyzovov. / V.D. Zor'kin. // Aktual'nye problemy teorii i praktiki konstitutsionnogo sudoproizvodstva (vypusk V). Kazan', 2010.-S. 21-23.
Kokotov A.N. Ispolnenie resheniy Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii // Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava.-2013.-N 5.-S. 90-101.
Kryazhkov V.A. Konstitutsionnaya kul'tura v zerkale pravosudiya Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii // Zhurnal konstitutsionnogo pravosudiya.-2008.-N 3.-S. 8.
Lazarev L. Stat'ya: Ispolnenie resheniy Konstitutsionnogo Suda RF // Rossiyskaya yustitsiya.-N 9.-2002. — S. 19.
Mokoseeva M.A. // Prichiny neispolneniya resheniy regional'nykh organov konstitutsionnogo kontrolya. Biznes v zakone. ¹ 5. S. 115-118.
Ovsepyan Zh.I. O vzaimodeystvii organov gosudarstvennoy vlasti RF v sfere ispolneniya resheniy, prinimaemykh Konstitutsionnym Sudom Rossiyskoy Federatsii i konstitutsionnymi (ustavnymi) sudami sub'ektov Rossiyskoy Federatsii // Problemy ispolneniya federal'nymi organami gosudarstvennoy vlasti i organami gosudarstvennoy vlasti sub'ektov Rossiyskoy Federatsii resheniy Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii i konstitutsionnykh (ustavnykh) sudov sub'ektov Rossiyskoy Federatsii. Materialy Vserossiyskogo soveshchaniya (Moskva, 22 marta 2001 g.) / Pod red. M.A. Mityukova, S.V. Kabysheva, V.K. Bobrovoy i S.E. Andreeva.-M., 2001.-S. 149-158.

Abstract: The scientific article seeks to analyze judicial review as a general administrative control process by looking generally at its common-law origins. The author defines the role of judicial review and the space for consideration of alternative ways of disputes settlement. The aim is to analyze the nature of judicial review and the peculiarities of its functioning. Through this, an appropriate place for the courts and judicial review can be determined, both constitutionally and institutionally, within an inclusive system of administrative justice. General scientific methods of cognition such as the methods of analysis, comparative methods, systems and structural methods, legal and technical research methods form the methodological basis of the article.An underlying assumption of this article is that judicial review is being used in a manner for which it was not designed. As a primary avenue of administrative justice, it fails to accord the level of justice that it should. The criticisms which relate to judicial review do so largely because it is being relied on to perform all the tasks which should be allocated to a larger and more integrated system of administrative law.

Keywords: watchdog theory, Ultra Vires Doctrine, legality, merits review, administrative tribunals, judicial review, supervision, appeal, reasons, finality

References:
Boulle, Harris & Hoexter Constitutional and Administrative Law. 1989. S. 246-251.
President of the Republic of South Africa and Others v South African Rugby Football Union and Others.(SARFU 3). 2000. S. 148.
Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association of South Africa and Another: In Ex Parte President of the Republic of South Africa and Others. 2000. S. 674.
Boulle Constitutional and Administrative Law. 1999. S. 256.
Milne AJ Estate Geekie Union Government. 1948. S. 502.
Hoexter Administrative Law. 2004. S. 104-105.
Milne J South African Roads Board v Johannesburg City Council. 1991. S. 13.
Woolf De Smith‘s Judicial Review. 2011. S. 3.
Fuller The Forms and Limits of Adjudication.1992. S. 353.
Hoexter Administrative Law. 2000. S. 18; Harlow & Rawlings Law and Administration. 2011. S. 123. ; Hutchinson The Rise and Ruse of Administrative Law and Scholarship. 1985. S. 293.
Cane Administrative Law. 2004. S. 378.
Galligan Judicial Review and the Textbook Writers. 2012. S. 257.

References (transliteration):
Boulle, Harris & Hoexter Constitutional and Administrative Law. 1989. S. 246-251.
President of the Republic of South Africa and Others v South African Rugby Football Union and Others.(SARFU 3). 2000. S. 148.
Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association of South Africa and Another: In Ex Parte President of the Republic of South Africa and Others. 2000. S. 674.
Boulle Constitutional and Administrative Law. 1999. S. 256.
Milne AJ Estate Geekie Union Government. 1948. S. 502.
Hoexter Administrative Law. 2004. S. 104-105.
Milne J South African Roads Board v Johannesburg City Council. 1991. S. 13.
Woolf De Smith‘s Judicial Review. 2011. S. 3.
Fuller The Forms and Limits of Adjudication.1992. S. 353.
Hoexter Administrative Law. 2000. S. 18; Harlow & Rawlings Law and Administration. 2011. S. 123. ; Hutchinson The Rise and Ruse of Administrative Law and Scholarship. 1985. S. 293.
Cane Administrative Law. 2004. S. 378.
Galligan Judicial Review and the Textbook Writers. 2012. S. 257.

Abstract: The subject of the research is a range of norms of the Code of administrative proceedings of the Russian Federation regulating the delimitation of jurisdiction of cases on challenging normative legal acts between the courts of general jurisdiction and the bodies of constitutional justice. The article shows the possible problems, caused by the legal regulation of the grounds and the procedure of a court of general jurisdiction making an inquiry about the considered administrative case to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, and the peculiarities of use of administrative proceedings for the provision of the enforcement of the decisions of the bodies of constitutional justice. The author uses the general scientific (dialectical, systems) and the special (comparative legal, formal-legal) methods, helping to identify the main problems in the delimitation of jurisdiction and interaction between the courts of general jurisdiction and constitutional bodies, to detefine the ways of their solution. The scientific novelty of the article lies in the substantiation of the need for the improvement of implementation of the regulation limits of the powers of courts of general jurisdiction in the field of normative control considering the content of the related institutions of constitutional proceedings. The author shows the shortcomings of the current legislative regulation of the competence of the judicial bodies (incompleteness and inaccuracy of certain norms, the possibility of different interpretations, substantial inconsistency of regulations with certain legal positions of the Constitutional Court, and others), and proposes the measures of these shortcomings elimination.

Keywords: court, code, jurisdiction, administrative proceedings, Constitutional control, justice, interaction, inquiry, legislation, norm

References:
Brezhnev O.V. Zakon "O Konstitutsionnom Sude Rossiyskoy Federatsii": novelly 2014 g. i problemy ikh realizatsii // Pravo i politika.-2014.-9.-C. 1405-1414. DOI: 10.7256/1811-9018.2014.9.12660.
Prizhennikova A.N. Razvitie zakonodatel'stva ob administrativnom sudoproizvodstve: aktual'nye voprosy. // NB: Administrativnoe pravo i praktika administrirovaniya.-2014.-3.-C. 50-60. DOI: 10.7256/2306-9945.2014.3.11848. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/al/article_11848.html
Fokov A.P. Sovremennye problemy administrativnoy yustitsii v Rossii: administrativnye sudy – «za» i «protiv» // Rossiyskiy sud'ya.-2012.-¹ 2.-S. 2-5.
Tatarinov S.A. Problemy razgranicheniya kompetentsii mezhdu Konstitutsionnym Sudom Rossiyskoy Federatsii i sudami obshchey i arbitrazhnoy yurisdiktsii v sfere osushchestvleniya normokontrolya // Zhurnal konstitutsionnogo pravosudiya.-2009.-¹ 2.-S. 8-12.
Starilov Yu.N. Administrativnoe sudoproizvodstvo i administrativnye sudy v Rossiyskoy Federatsii: real'nost' i perspektivy // Rossiyskiy sud'ya.-2012.-¹ 12.-S. 20-29.
Skoblikov P.A. Kodeks administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva: probely i kollizii ofitsial'nogo proekta // Zakonodatel'stvo.-2014.-¹ 3.-S. 46-50.
Peshkova T.V. Administrativnoe sudoproizvodstvo v sudakh obshchey yurisdiktsii kak forma osushchestvleniya sudebnoy vlasti // Administrativnoe pravo i protsess.-2012.-¹ 11.-S. 41-43.
Pavlova M.S. Kodeks administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva: tendentsii i perspektivy razvitiya v Rossii // Rossiyskaya yustitsiya.-2013.-¹ 11.-S. 34-38.
Murzina E.A. Administrativnoe sudoproizvodstvo – samostoyatel'nyy vid osushchestvleniya sudebnoy vlasti: ponyatie, predmet i osobennosti // Administrator suda.-2013.-¹ 3.-S. 19-23.
Meshcheryakov P.N. Polnomochiya sudov obshchey yurisdiktsii v sfere normokontrolya i sudebnyy zapros v Konstitutsionnyy Sud RF: pravovoe regulirovanie i problemy realizatsii // Sovremennoe pravo.-2011.-¹ 8.-S. 108-112.
Gavryusov Yu.V. Razgranichenie podvedomstvennosti del mezhdu organami konstitutsionnoy yustitsii sub'ektov Rossiyskoy Federatsii i sudami obshchey i arbitrazhnoy yurisdiktsii // Rossiyskoe pravosudie.-2010.-¹ 9.-S. 21-27.
Zagrivko D.S. Printsipy osushchestvleniya administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva Rossii // Pravo i politika.-2014.-¹ 2.-S. 181-186.
Anishina V.I., Shumakov A.S. Zapros suda v sisteme mer zashchity konstitutsionnykh prav grazhdan //Konstitutsionnoe i munitsipal'noe pravo.-2008.-¹ 8.-S. 20-24.
Baranov V.A., Prizhennikova A.N. Aktual'nost' institutov administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva zarubezhnykh stran dlya rossiyskogo zakonodatel'stva // Administrativnoe i munitsipal'noe pravo.-2014.-¹ 1.-S. 53-57.
Prizhennikova A.N. Problemy formirovaniya sovremennoy modeli administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva v Rossii // Administrativnoe i munitsipal'noe pravo.-2013.-6.-C. 673-679. DOI: 10.7256/1999-2807.2013.06.12.

References (transliteration):
Brezhnev O.V. Zakon "O Konstitutsionnom Sude Rossiyskoy Federatsii": novelly 2014 g. i problemy ikh realizatsii // Pravo i politika.-2014.-9.-C. 1405-1414. DOI: 10.7256/1811-9018.2014.9.12660.
Prizhennikova A.N. Razvitie zakonodatel'stva ob administrativnom sudoproizvodstve: aktual'nye voprosy. // NB: Administrativnoe pravo i praktika administrirovaniya.-2014.-3.-C. 50-60. DOI: 10.7256/2306-9945.2014.3.11848. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/al/article_11848.html
Fokov A.P. Sovremennye problemy administrativnoy yustitsii v Rossii: administrativnye sudy – «za» i «protiv» // Rossiyskiy sud'ya.-2012.-¹ 2.-S. 2-5.
Tatarinov S.A. Problemy razgranicheniya kompetentsii mezhdu Konstitutsionnym Sudom Rossiyskoy Federatsii i sudami obshchey i arbitrazhnoy yurisdiktsii v sfere osushchestvleniya normokontrolya // Zhurnal konstitutsionnogo pravosudiya.-2009.-¹ 2.-S. 8-12.
Starilov Yu.N. Administrativnoe sudoproizvodstvo i administrativnye sudy v Rossiyskoy Federatsii: real'nost' i perspektivy // Rossiyskiy sud'ya.-2012.-¹ 12.-S. 20-29.
Skoblikov P.A. Kodeks administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva: probely i kollizii ofitsial'nogo proekta // Zakonodatel'stvo.-2014.-¹ 3.-S. 46-50.
Peshkova T.V. Administrativnoe sudoproizvodstvo v sudakh obshchey yurisdiktsii kak forma osushchestvleniya sudebnoy vlasti // Administrativnoe pravo i protsess.-2012.-¹ 11.-S. 41-43.
Pavlova M.S. Kodeks administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva: tendentsii i perspektivy razvitiya v Rossii // Rossiyskaya yustitsiya.-2013.-¹ 11.-S. 34-38.
Murzina E.A. Administrativnoe sudoproizvodstvo – samostoyatel'nyy vid osushchestvleniya sudebnoy vlasti: ponyatie, predmet i osobennosti // Administrator suda.-2013.-¹ 3.-S. 19-23.
Meshcheryakov P.N. Polnomochiya sudov obshchey yurisdiktsii v sfere normokontrolya i sudebnyy zapros v Konstitutsionnyy Sud RF: pravovoe regulirovanie i problemy realizatsii // Sovremennoe pravo.-2011.-¹ 8.-S. 108-112.
Gavryusov Yu.V. Razgranichenie podvedomstvennosti del mezhdu organami konstitutsionnoy yustitsii sub'ektov Rossiyskoy Federatsii i sudami obshchey i arbitrazhnoy yurisdiktsii // Rossiyskoe pravosudie.-2010.-¹ 9.-S. 21-27.
Zagrivko D.S. Printsipy osushchestvleniya administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva Rossii // Pravo i politika.-2014.-¹ 2.-S. 181-186.
Anishina V.I., Shumakov A.S. Zapros suda v sisteme mer zashchity konstitutsionnykh prav grazhdan //Konstitutsionnoe i munitsipal'noe pravo.-2008.-¹ 8.-S. 20-24.
Baranov V.A., Prizhennikova A.N. Aktual'nost' institutov administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva zarubezhnykh stran dlya rossiyskogo zakonodatel'stva // Administrativnoe i munitsipal'noe pravo.-2014.-¹ 1.-S. 53-57.
Prizhennikova A.N. Problemy formirovaniya sovremennoy modeli administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva v Rossii // Administrativnoe i munitsipal'noe pravo.-2013.-6.-C. 673-679. DOI: 10.7256/1999-2807.2013.06.12.

Abstract: The article is devoted to analysis of the status of the Constitutional Court of Montenegro. Special attention is paid to the reform of the institution of judicial constitutional control, which took place in 2013-2014. The reform influenced the formation of the Constitutional Court, its administrative autonomy, internal organization, procedures for the constitutional judicial process. At the same time the earlier formed European model of constitutional control was not changed. Generally, the amendments are aimed at making the constitutional justice body more efficient, guaranteeing openness and transparency of the judicial proceedings and formation of the court. In the process of analysis the author mostly uses historic method, formal legal method and comparative legal method of studies. As a conclusion, the author notes that implementation of the positive democratic fundamentals of the reform of the constitutional justice in Montenegro involved some misunderstandings. That is why there are serious doubts regarding legitimacy of the new corpus of the Constitutional Court of Montenegro and its decisions, which is not acceptable in a rule of law state, since it undermines the authority and causes distrust of the state government bodies and especially the Constitutional Court of Montenegro.

Keywords: Montenegro, constitutional reform, constitutional court, constitutional control, administrative autonomy of a court, constitutional process, Yugoslavia, constitutionality, constitutional justice, constitution.

Contact information: Milchakova, Olesya Vladimirovna, 123995, Russia, Moskva, ul. Sadovaya-Kudrinskaya, 9.

References:
Vitruk N. V. Konstitutsionnoe pravosudie. Sudebno-konstitutsionnoe pravo i protsess: ucheb. posobie. – 3-e izd., pererab. i dop. M., 2011.-592 s.
Konstitutsionalizm: ideal i/ili real'nost': Sbornik materialov diskussii za kruglym stolom 4 fevralya 2011 goda / Pod red. B. A. Strashuna, I. A. Alebastrovoy. M., 2012.-255 s.
Konstitutsionnyy kontrol': doktrina i praktika: materialy mezhdunarodnoy konferentsii, posvyashchennoy 20-letiyu Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii (Sankt-Peterburg, 28-29 oktyabrya 2011 g.) / Pod red. V. D. Zor'kina. M., 2012.-464 s.
Konstitutsionnyy kontrol' v zarubezhnykh stranakh: ucheb. posobie / otv. red. V. V. Maklakov. – 2-e izd., ispr. i dop. M., 2010.-672 s.
Mezhdunarodnyy tribunal po byvshey Yugoslavii: Deyatel'nost', rezul'taty, effektivnost'. Materialy Mezhdunarodnoy nauchnoy konferentsii (Moskva, 22 – 23 aprelya 2009 g.) / Otv. red. E. Yu. Gus'kova. M., 2012.-544 s.
Mesich S. Kak razvalilas' Yugoslaviya. M., 2013.-394 s.
Mil'chakova O. V. Konstitutsionnaya yustitsiya v Khorvatii: stanovlenie, razvitie, osnovy organizatsii. Monografiya. M., 2013.-174 s.
Mil'chakova O. V. Konstitutsionnyy kontrol' v stranakh byvshey Yugoslavii. M., 2014.-308 s.
Nuriev G. Kh. Evropeyskaya model' konstitutsionnogo sudoproizvodstva. M., 2012.-224 s.
Ponomareva E. G. Novye gosudarstva na Balkanakh: Monografiya. M., 2010.-252 s.
Ustavni sud Srbije: chetrdeset godina postojaœa (priredili Svetozar Chipliž, Lilana Slavniž). Beograd, 2003.-64 s.
Dobrynin N.M. Kratkiy ocherk o sud'be rossiyskogo konstitutsionalizma: o sushchnosti, evolyutsii i neotlozhnosti konstitutsionnoy reformy // Pravo i politika. - 2013. - 12. - C. 1737 - 1752. DOI: 10.7256/1811-9018.2013.12.10142.
F. K. Esieva Evolyutsiya vysshikh organov gosudarstvennoy
vlasti na zavershayushchem etape razvitiya
sovetskoy gosudarstvennosti // Politika i Obshchestvo. - 2012. - 2. - C. 13 - 18.

References (transliteration):
Vitruk N. V. Konstitutsionnoe pravosudie. Sudebno-konstitutsionnoe pravo i protsess: ucheb. posobie. – 3-e izd., pererab. i dop. M., 2011.-592 s.
Konstitutsionalizm: ideal i/ili real'nost': Sbornik materialov diskussii za kruglym stolom 4 fevralya 2011 goda / Pod red. B. A. Strashuna, I. A. Alebastrovoy. M., 2012.-255 s.
Konstitutsionnyy kontrol': doktrina i praktika: materialy mezhdunarodnoy konferentsii, posvyashchennoy 20-letiyu Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii (Sankt-Peterburg, 28-29 oktyabrya 2011 g.) / Pod red. V. D. Zor'kina. M., 2012.-464 s.
Konstitutsionnyy kontrol' v zarubezhnykh stranakh: ucheb. posobie / otv. red. V. V. Maklakov. – 2-e izd., ispr. i dop. M., 2010.-672 s.
Mezhdunarodnyy tribunal po byvshey Yugoslavii: Deyatel'nost', rezul'taty, effektivnost'. Materialy Mezhdunarodnoy nauchnoy konferentsii (Moskva, 22 – 23 aprelya 2009 g.) / Otv. red. E. Yu. Gus'kova. M., 2012.-544 s.
Mesich S. Kak razvalilas' Yugoslaviya. M., 2013.-394 s.
Mil'chakova O. V. Konstitutsionnaya yustitsiya v Khorvatii: stanovlenie, razvitie, osnovy organizatsii. Monografiya. M., 2013.-174 s.
Mil'chakova O. V. Konstitutsionnyy kontrol' v stranakh byvshey Yugoslavii. M., 2014.-308 s.
Nuriev G. Kh. Evropeyskaya model' konstitutsionnogo sudoproizvodstva. M., 2012.-224 s.
Ponomareva E. G. Novye gosudarstva na Balkanakh: Monografiya. M., 2010.-252 s.
Ustavni sud Srbije: chetrdeset godina postojaœa (priredili Svetozar Chipliž, Lilana Slavniž). Beograd, 2003.-64 s.
Dobrynin N.M. Kratkiy ocherk o sud'be rossiyskogo konstitutsionalizma: o sushchnosti, evolyutsii i neotlozhnosti konstitutsionnoy reformy // Pravo i politika. - 2013. - 12. - C. 1737 - 1752. DOI: 10.7256/1811-9018.2013.12.10142.
F. K. Esieva Evolyutsiya vysshikh organov gosudarstvennoy
vlasti na zavershayushchem etape razvitiya
sovetskoy gosudarstvennosti // Politika i Obshchestvo. - 2012. - 2. - C. 13 - 18.

Abstract: Currently administrative justice bodies are undergoing reforms in many states around the world. Each state has its specific administrative justice system, and they have various modifications in accordance with the history and traditions of the state. Having evaluated the legal position of administrative justice in the foreign states and in the former USSR states, one may state that more and more attention is paid to the problem of improving the relations between the private parties and the public administration (state government bodies, municipal bodies and their officials) and the need to introduce efficient mechanisms for the protection of private persons from possible infringements of their rights by the government bodies. Administrative justice is a judicial mechanism for the protection of human rights from abuse by the public administration. That is its value in the rule-of-law state. The institution of administrative justice is aimed to neutralize the legal inequality of the parties in administrative dispute. The authors make a conclusion that studying the experience of functioning of the administrative justice bodies in the foreign states may help the Russian Federation to find out optimum approaches towards forming its own model of administrative justice. Russia needs administrative courts. Administrative cases should be dealt with within an independent administrative process and be regulated by the Administrative Judicial Procedural Code, which would allow to establish methodology and other procedural acts on hearing and resolving cases arising from this type of relations.

Keywords: administrative justice, administrative claim, administrative judicial proceedings, administrative process, judicial reform, administrative procedures, administrative disputes, specialized courts, administrative cases, public relations.

Contact information: Prizhennikova, Alyona Nikolaevna, 109456, Russia, Moskva, 4 Veshnyakovskiy pr., 4.

References:
Boytsova V.V., Boytsova L.V. Sistemy sudebnogo kontrolya za administratsiey: klassicheskie modeli i modifikatsii. Materialy seminara. – M., 2002. – S. 18-31.
Salishcheva N.G., Khamaneva N.Yu. Administrativnaya yustitsiya i administrativnoe sudoproizvodstvo v Rossiyskoy Federatsii. –M., 2001. S. 4-21.
Zelentsov A.B. Administrativnaya yustitsiya//URL:// http://rudocs.exdat.com.
Zherar Marku. Struktura administrativnoy yustitsii: opyt primeneniya razlichnykh modeley // Mezhdunarodnyy ekspertnyy seminar «Rol' administrativnoy yustitsii v zashchite prav cheloveka» 14-15 dekabrya, 2009 g.// URL://http://eu-kaz-humanrights-2012, org.
Zherar Marku. Struktura administrativnoy yustitsii: opyt primeneniya razlichnykh modeley. Tam zhe.
Prizhennikova A.N. Sozdanie administrativnykh sudov-nasushchnaya neobkhodimost' rossiyskoy sudebnoy sistemy // Administrativnoe pravo i protsess.-2010.-¹ 3.
Vlasov A. Kakoy budet administrativnaya yustitsiya? // Rossiyskaya yustitsiya.-2002.-¹ 11.-S. 18; Salishcheva N.G., Khamaneva N.Yu. Administrativnaya yustitsiya, administrativnoe sudoproizvodstvo // Gosudarstvo i pravo.-2002.-¹ 1.-S. 8; Starilov Yu.N. Administrativnye sudy: novye argumenty «za» i «protiv» / Pod red. V.N. Radchenko. M., 2004.-S. 95; Prizhennikova A.N. Aktual'nye voprosy v sovershenstvovanii administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva v Rossii // Sbornik molodykh uchenykh, MGIU. M: 2004; Ona zhe: Administrativnoe sudoproizvodstvo v RF: sostoyanie i perspektivy razvitiya: avtoref. dis. …kand. yurid. nauk: 12.00.14 / Prizhennikova A.N. M., 2005; Baranov V.A., Prizhennikova A.N. Aktual'nye aspekty administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva v RF // Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo industrial'nogo universiteta. M:MGMU, 2005; Prizhennikova A.N. Sozdanie administrativnykh sudov – nasushchnaya neobkhodimost' rossiyskoy sudebnoy sistemy // Administrativnoe pravo i protsess.-2010.-¹ 3.
Breban G. Frantsuzskoe administrativnoe pravo. — M., 1988.
Zelentsov A.B. Teoreticheskie problemy administrativnogo iska // Pravovedenie. — 2005. — ¹ 6; Ego zhe. Administrativnoe sudoproizvodstvo v Rossii: problemy pravovogo regulirovaniya // Konstitutsionnoe pravo: vostochnoevropeyskoe obozrenie. — 2003. — ¹ 2.
URL://http://www.zakon.kz/4468884-perspektivy-razvitija-administrativnojj.html.
Prizhennikova A.N. Sostoyanie pravovogo regulirovaniya administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva: puti resheniya. // NB: Administrativnoe pravo i praktika administrirovaniya. - 2013. - 5. - C. 70 - 85. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/al/article_8739.html

References (transliteration):
Boytsova V.V., Boytsova L.V. Sistemy sudebnogo kontrolya za administratsiey: klassicheskie modeli i modifikatsii. Materialy seminara. – M., 2002. – S. 18-31.
Salishcheva N.G., Khamaneva N.Yu. Administrativnaya yustitsiya i administrativnoe sudoproizvodstvo v Rossiyskoy Federatsii. –M., 2001. S. 4-21.
Zelentsov A.B. Administrativnaya yustitsiya//URL:// http://rudocs.exdat.com.
Zherar Marku. Struktura administrativnoy yustitsii: opyt primeneniya razlichnykh modeley // Mezhdunarodnyy ekspertnyy seminar «Rol' administrativnoy yustitsii v zashchite prav cheloveka» 14-15 dekabrya, 2009 g.// URL://http://eu-kaz-humanrights-2012, org.
Zherar Marku. Struktura administrativnoy yustitsii: opyt primeneniya razlichnykh modeley. Tam zhe.
Prizhennikova A.N. Sozdanie administrativnykh sudov-nasushchnaya neobkhodimost' rossiyskoy sudebnoy sistemy // Administrativnoe pravo i protsess.-2010.-¹ 3.
Vlasov A. Kakoy budet administrativnaya yustitsiya? // Rossiyskaya yustitsiya.-2002.-¹ 11.-S. 18; Salishcheva N.G., Khamaneva N.Yu. Administrativnaya yustitsiya, administrativnoe sudoproizvodstvo // Gosudarstvo i pravo.-2002.-¹ 1.-S. 8; Starilov Yu.N. Administrativnye sudy: novye argumenty «za» i «protiv» / Pod red. V.N. Radchenko. M., 2004.-S. 95; Prizhennikova A.N. Aktual'nye voprosy v sovershenstvovanii administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva v Rossii // Sbornik molodykh uchenykh, MGIU. M: 2004; Ona zhe: Administrativnoe sudoproizvodstvo v RF: sostoyanie i perspektivy razvitiya: avtoref. dis. …kand. yurid. nauk: 12.00.14 / Prizhennikova A.N. M., 2005; Baranov V.A., Prizhennikova A.N. Aktual'nye aspekty administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva v RF // Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo industrial'nogo universiteta. M:MGMU, 2005; Prizhennikova A.N. Sozdanie administrativnykh sudov – nasushchnaya neobkhodimost' rossiyskoy sudebnoy sistemy // Administrativnoe pravo i protsess.-2010.-¹ 3.
Breban G. Frantsuzskoe administrativnoe pravo. — M., 1988.
Zelentsov A.B. Teoreticheskie problemy administrativnogo iska // Pravovedenie. — 2005. — ¹ 6; Ego zhe. Administrativnoe sudoproizvodstvo v Rossii: problemy pravovogo regulirovaniya // Konstitutsionnoe pravo: vostochnoevropeyskoe obozrenie. — 2003. — ¹ 2.
URL://http://www.zakon.kz/4468884-perspektivy-razvitija-administrativnojj.html.
Prizhennikova A.N. Sostoyanie pravovogo regulirovaniya administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva: puti resheniya. // NB: Administrativnoe pravo i praktika administrirovaniya. - 2013. - 5. - C. 70 - 85. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/al/article_8739.html

Abstract: The principles of separation of powers and territorial structure of a state inevitably cause competence disputes (disputes on jurisdiction) among the central government bodies, between the central government bodies and territorial unit bodies, as well as the disputes between the territorial unit bodies. In this article the author pays attention to the specific features of defining constitutional legal disputes (competence disputes) and specific features of their evaluation by the Constitutional court. The study is based upon the Russian and foreign legislation, and the experience of the constitutional courts of the states formed in the former Yugoslavia territory (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia, Serbia, Slovenia, Croatia, and Montenegro). The study mostly employs formal legal and comparative legal methods. Based upon the analysis of the foreign legislation and practice of the constitutional courts of the former Yugoslavia, the author substantiates the classification of competence disputes, providing for a distinction between horizontal and vertical ones, negative and positive ones. It is pointed out that the necessary condition for a competence dispute is the situation when two or more public government bodies pass final acts recognizing or refusing to recognize their competence on the same issue. Finally, the author concludes that resolution of competence disputes by the constitutional court in the states within the former Yugoslavia is more democratic than in Russia, since they allow any person who cannot implement his rights, and not just a government body, which is a party to the dispute, to bring a claim in court to resolve such a dispute.

Keywords: jurisdiction disputes, competence disputes, the Constitutional Court, former Yugoslavia state, constitutional procedure, constitutional judicial process, competence, competence recognition, denying competence, separation of powers principle

Contact information: Milchakova, Olesya Vladimirovna, 123995, Russia, Moskva, ul. Sadovaya-Kudrinskaya, 9.

References:
Bondar' N. S. Sudebnyy konstitutsionalizm v Rossii v svete konstitutsionnogo pravosudiya. M., 2011.-544 s.
Vitruk N. V. Konstitutsionnoe pravosudie. Sudebno-konstitutsionnoe pravo i protsess: ucheb. posobie. – 3-e izd., pererab. i dop. M., 2011.-592 s.
Klishas A. A. Konstitutsionnyy kontrol' i konstitutsionnoe pravosudie zarubezhnykh stran. Sravnitel'no-pravovoe issledovanie / Pod red. V. V. Eremyana. M., 2007.-496 s.
Kobzar' D. A. Sudebnoe razreshenie konstitutsionno-pravovykh sporov o kompetentsii v Rossiyskoy Federatsii: Avtoreferat diss. na soisk. uch. step. kand. yurid. nauk. M., 2005.-22 c.
Konstitutsionnyy kontrol' v zarubezhnykh stranakh: ucheb. posobie / otv. red. V. V. Maklakov. – 2-e izd., ispr. i dop. M., 2010.-672 s.
Kutafin O. E., Fadeev V. I. Munitsipal'noe pravo Rossiyskoy Federatsii. M., 2011.-672 s.
Nuriev G. Kh. Evropeyskaya model' konstitutsionnogo sudoproizvodstva. M., 2012.-224 s.
Nesmeyanova S. E. Konstitutsionnyy sudebnyy protsess v Rossii: Ucheb. posobie. M., 2012.-204 s.
Tikhomirov Yu. A. Spory o kompetentsii. // Pravo i ekonomika. 2001. ¹ 2. S. 3-7.
O. A. Kozhevnikov Nekotorye problemy v razgranichenii podvedomstvennosti sporov mezhdu sudami obshchey yurisdiktsii i konstitutsionnymi (ustavnymi) sudami sub'ektov RF i puti ikh razresheniya // Pravo i politika. - 2012. - 5. - C. 897 - 901.
S.V. Narutto Konstitutsionnyy sudebnyy protsess: ponyatie, priznaki, osobennosti // Pravo i politika. - 2013. - 5. - C. 708 - 713. DOI: 10.7256/1811-9018.2013.05.15.
Starodubtseva I.A. Konstitutsionnye osnovy predotvrashcheniya i razresheniya kolliziy v Rossii i zarubezhnykh stranakh: sravnitel'no-pravovoe issledovanie // Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel'stva i sravnitel'nogo pravovedeniya. - 2012. - 6. - C. 23 - 29.
S. V. Narutto Printsip konstitutsionnosti razgranicheniya kompetentsii mezhdu organami gosudarstvennoy vlasti Rossiyskoy Federatsii i ee sub'ektov v sudebnoy praktike // Pravo i politika. - 2012. - 9. - C. 1471 - 1478.

References (transliteration):
Bondar' N. S. Sudebnyy konstitutsionalizm v Rossii v svete konstitutsionnogo pravosudiya. M., 2011.-544 s.
Vitruk N. V. Konstitutsionnoe pravosudie. Sudebno-konstitutsionnoe pravo i protsess: ucheb. posobie. – 3-e izd., pererab. i dop. M., 2011.-592 s.
Klishas A. A. Konstitutsionnyy kontrol' i konstitutsionnoe pravosudie zarubezhnykh stran. Sravnitel'no-pravovoe issledovanie / Pod red. V. V. Eremyana. M., 2007.-496 s.
Kobzar' D. A. Sudebnoe razreshenie konstitutsionno-pravovykh sporov o kompetentsii v Rossiyskoy Federatsii: Avtoreferat diss. na soisk. uch. step. kand. yurid. nauk. M., 2005.-22 c.
Konstitutsionnyy kontrol' v zarubezhnykh stranakh: ucheb. posobie / otv. red. V. V. Maklakov. – 2-e izd., ispr. i dop. M., 2010.-672 s.
Kutafin O. E., Fadeev V. I. Munitsipal'noe pravo Rossiyskoy Federatsii. M., 2011.-672 s.
Nuriev G. Kh. Evropeyskaya model' konstitutsionnogo sudoproizvodstva. M., 2012.-224 s.
Nesmeyanova S. E. Konstitutsionnyy sudebnyy protsess v Rossii: Ucheb. posobie. M., 2012.-204 s.
Tikhomirov Yu. A. Spory o kompetentsii. // Pravo i ekonomika. 2001. ¹ 2. S. 3-7.
O. A. Kozhevnikov Nekotorye problemy v razgranichenii podvedomstvennosti sporov mezhdu sudami obshchey yurisdiktsii i konstitutsionnymi (ustavnymi) sudami sub'ektov RF i puti ikh razresheniya // Pravo i politika. - 2012. - 5. - C. 897 - 901.
S.V. Narutto Konstitutsionnyy sudebnyy protsess: ponyatie, priznaki, osobennosti // Pravo i politika. - 2013. - 5. - C. 708 - 713. DOI: 10.7256/1811-9018.2013.05.15.
Starodubtseva I.A. Konstitutsionnye osnovy predotvrashcheniya i razresheniya kolliziy v Rossii i zarubezhnykh stranakh: sravnitel'no-pravovoe issledovanie // Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel'stva i sravnitel'nogo pravovedeniya. - 2012. - 6. - C. 23 - 29.
S. V. Narutto Printsip konstitutsionnosti razgranicheniya kompetentsii mezhdu organami gosudarstvennoy vlasti Rossiyskoy Federatsii i ee sub'ektov v sudebnoy praktike // Pravo i politika. - 2012. - 9. - C. 1471 - 1478.

Abstract: Based upon the large amount of normative materials and archive data the author evaluates the problem of the relations between the courts and local executive bodies in the first two decades of the existence of the RSFSR. It is noted that starting with 1917 the state departed from the previously existing principle of pre- Revolutionary Russia that the judges should be independent from the executive branch. It is shown that the active interference of local executive bodies into the work of courts, and the active role of the executive committees in the procedure of assigning and resignation of judges of the courts of the general jurisdiction lead to the lower efficiency of court work, staff turnover and the courts becoming accountable to the executive branch. The author makes a conclusion that throughout the period in question the problem of independence of the judicial branch of government from the executive branch of government remained unsolved in spite of all of the efforts of the Soviet Government taken in order to limit the influence of the executive committees, which was due to the specific features of the Soviet administrative model.

Keywords: p eople’s judge, province judge, e xecutive branch of government, e xecutive c ommittee, t he S oviets, repeal, the People’s Commissariat of Justice, independency of judges, judicial corpus, the RSFSR.

Contact information: Sevryukov Daniil Sergeevich, 305000, Russia, Kursk, ul. Lenina, 60, 4 etazh, of. 36.

References:
Stuchka P. I. Mysli o nashem pravosudii // Ezhenedel'nik sovetskoy yustitsiyu 1923. ¹ 22.
Sevryukov D. S. Pravovoe regulirovanie prekrashcheniya polnomochiy sudey sudov obshchey yurisdiktsii v 1917-1938 gg. // Pravo i politika. 2013. ¹ 5 (161). S. 684-690.
Berman Ya.L. Ocherki po istorii sudoustroystva RSFSR. M.: Yuridich. izd-vo Narkomyusta, 1924. 72 s.
Gosudarstvennyy arkhiv Rossiyskoy Federatsii. F. A-353. Op. 4. D. 1. L. 26.
Gosudarstvennyy arkhiv Rossiyskoy Federatsii. F. A-353. Op.
D. 60. L. 46 4. Gosudarstvennyy arkhiv Rossiyskoy Federatsii. F. A-353. Op. 4. D. 62. L. 105.
Gosudarstvennyy arkhiv Rossiyskoy Federatsii. F. A-353. Op. 4. D. 96. L. 4
Gosudarstvennyy arkhiv Rossiyskoy Federatsii. F. A-353. Op. 4. D. 71. L. 69
Gosudarstvennyy arkhiv Rossiyskoy Federatsii. F. A-353. Op. 16. D. 15. L. 26-26 ob.
Gosudarstvennyy arkhiv Rossiyskoy Federatsii. F. R-5881. Op. 2. D. 140. L. 17-27.
Gosudarstvennyy arkhiv Kurskoy oblasti. F. R-166. Op. 1. D. 27. L. 63
Gosudarstvennyy arkhiv Kurskoy oblasti. F. R-451. Op. 1. D. 13. L. 8ob-9.
Dekret VTsIK ot 21.10.1920 g. «Polozhenie o Narodnom Sude Rossiyskoy Sotsialisticheskoy Federativnoy Sovetskoy Respubliki» // SU RSFSR. 1920. ¹ 83. St. 407.
Dekret VTsIK ot 30.11. 1918 g. «Polozhenie o Narodnom Sude Rossiyskoy Sotsialisticheskoy Federativnoy Sovetskoy Respubliki» // SU RSFSR. 1918. ¹ 28. St. 366.
Lezov I. L.. Sovetskiy sud v 1917-1940 gg.: dis. ... kand. yurid. nauk. M., 1998. 161 s.
Lenin V. I. Doklad o prave otzyva na zasedanii VTsIK 21 noyabrya (4 dekabrya) 1917 g. // Polnoe sobranie sochineniy. Izd. 5-e. M., 1974. T. 35. S. 110.
Pashin S. Kratkiy ocherk sudebnykh reform i revolyutsiy v Rossii [Elektronnyy resurs]// Otechestvennye zapiski: http://www.strana-oz.ru (data obrashcheniya: 12.09.2011)
Postanovlenie VTsIK ot 11.11.1922 «O vvedenii v deystvie Polozheniya o sudoustroystve R.S.F.S.R.» // SU RSFSR. 1922. ¹ 69. St. 902.
Postanovlenie VTsIK ot 19.11.1926 g. «Ob utverzhdenii Polozheniya o Sudoustroystve R.S.F.S.R.» // SU RSFSR. 1926. ¹ 85. St. 624.
Rubinshteyn D.B. Ugolovnyy sud RSFSR (sistema i proizvodstvo). M.: Gos. izd-vo, 1924. 200 s.
Shkryl' E.O. Stanovlenie i organizatsionno-pravovoe razvitie sudebnogo upravleniya i sudebnogo nadzora v RSFSR (1917-1940 gg.): istoriko-pravovoe issledovanie : dis ... kand. yurid. nauk. Krasnodar, 2005. 180 s.
Shchedrina Yu. V. Kadrovye polnomochiya gubernatorov v sfere sudebnogo upravleniya v Rossii v 1860-kh – seredine 1880-kh gg. (k voprosu o nezavisimosti sudey) // Administrativnoe i munitsipal'noe pravo. 2012. ¹ 11. S. 44-53.

References (transliteration):
Stuchka P. I. Mysli o nashem pravosudii // Ezhenedel'nik sovetskoy yustitsiyu 1923. ¹ 22.
Sevryukov D. S. Pravovoe regulirovanie prekrashcheniya polnomochiy sudey sudov obshchey yurisdiktsii v 1917-1938 gg. // Pravo i politika. 2013. ¹ 5 (161). S. 684-690.
Berman Ya.L. Ocherki po istorii sudoustroystva RSFSR. M.: Yuridich. izd-vo Narkomyusta, 1924. 72 s.
Gosudarstvennyy arkhiv Rossiyskoy Federatsii. F. A-353. Op. 4. D. 1. L. 26.
Gosudarstvennyy arkhiv Rossiyskoy Federatsii. F. A-353. Op.
D. 60. L. 46 4. Gosudarstvennyy arkhiv Rossiyskoy Federatsii. F. A-353. Op. 4. D. 62. L. 105.
Gosudarstvennyy arkhiv Rossiyskoy Federatsii. F. A-353. Op. 4. D. 96. L. 4
Gosudarstvennyy arkhiv Rossiyskoy Federatsii. F. A-353. Op. 4. D. 71. L. 69
Gosudarstvennyy arkhiv Rossiyskoy Federatsii. F. A-353. Op. 16. D. 15. L. 26-26 ob.
Gosudarstvennyy arkhiv Rossiyskoy Federatsii. F. R-5881. Op. 2. D. 140. L. 17-27.
Gosudarstvennyy arkhiv Kurskoy oblasti. F. R-166. Op. 1. D. 27. L. 63
Gosudarstvennyy arkhiv Kurskoy oblasti. F. R-451. Op. 1. D. 13. L. 8ob-9.
Dekret VTsIK ot 21.10.1920 g. «Polozhenie o Narodnom Sude Rossiyskoy Sotsialisticheskoy Federativnoy Sovetskoy Respubliki» // SU RSFSR. 1920. ¹ 83. St. 407.
Dekret VTsIK ot 30.11. 1918 g. «Polozhenie o Narodnom Sude Rossiyskoy Sotsialisticheskoy Federativnoy Sovetskoy Respubliki» // SU RSFSR. 1918. ¹ 28. St. 366.
Lezov I. L.. Sovetskiy sud v 1917-1940 gg.: dis. ... kand. yurid. nauk. M., 1998. 161 s.
Lenin V. I. Doklad o prave otzyva na zasedanii VTsIK 21 noyabrya (4 dekabrya) 1917 g. // Polnoe sobranie sochineniy. Izd. 5-e. M., 1974. T. 35. S. 110.
Pashin S. Kratkiy ocherk sudebnykh reform i revolyutsiy v Rossii [Elektronnyy resurs]// Otechestvennye zapiski: http://www.strana-oz.ru (data obrashcheniya: 12.09.2011)
Postanovlenie VTsIK ot 11.11.1922 «O vvedenii v deystvie Polozheniya o sudoustroystve R.S.F.S.R.» // SU RSFSR. 1922. ¹ 69. St. 902.
Postanovlenie VTsIK ot 19.11.1926 g. «Ob utverzhdenii Polozheniya o Sudoustroystve R.S.F.S.R.» // SU RSFSR. 1926. ¹ 85. St. 624.
Rubinshteyn D.B. Ugolovnyy sud RSFSR (sistema i proizvodstvo). M.: Gos. izd-vo, 1924. 200 s.
Shkryl' E.O. Stanovlenie i organizatsionno-pravovoe razvitie sudebnogo upravleniya i sudebnogo nadzora v RSFSR (1917-1940 gg.): istoriko-pravovoe issledovanie : dis ... kand. yurid. nauk. Krasnodar, 2005. 180 s.
Shchedrina Yu. V. Kadrovye polnomochiya gubernatorov v sfere sudebnogo upravleniya v Rossii v 1860-kh – seredine 1880-kh gg. (k voprosu o nezavisimosti sudey) // Administrativnoe i munitsipal'noe pravo. 2012. ¹ 11. S. 44-53.