The regional prosecutor's office has studied judicial practice on complaints against the actions of bailiffs

The procedure for appealing a ruling, actions (inaction) of a bailiff, as well as a ruling, actions (inaction) of the head of the enforcement authority, related to the direct execution of executive documents, is established by Articles 124-127 of the Law of the Republic of Belarus "On Enforcement Proceedings" (hereinafter referred to as the Law). A complaint against the actions of a bailiff is filed in subordination to the head of the enforcement authority, a complaint against the actions of the head of the enforcement department related to the direct execution of executive documents is filed to the higher-ranking head of the enforcement authority, and in case of disagreement with their decision - to the court.

Pursuant to Article 127 of the Law, complaints against the rulings of a bailiff, as well as against the rulings of the head of the enforcement authority related to the direct execution of executive documents, may be filed within ten days from the date of receipt of the corresponding rulings of the bailiff, the head of the enforcement authority. Complaints against the actions (inaction) of a bailiff, as well as against the actions (inaction) of the head of the enforcement authority related to the direct execution of executive documents, may be filed within ten days from the date of commission of these actions (establishment of the fact of inaction) or from the date when the complainant, not notified of the time and place of commission of such actions, learned or should have learned about their commission.

In case of missing the deadline for applying to the court for a valid reason, it may be restored by the court.

Complaints must comply with the requirements established byArticle 126of the Law. In this case, the complaint must also indicate information about the executive document in connection with the execution of which the ruling or actions (inaction) are being appealed; a document confirming the sending of a copy shall be attached thereto.

complaints to the bailiff, the head of the enforcement authority, whose resolutions, actions (inaction) are being appealed (protested), and to the other party to the enforcement proceedings, or other documents confirming their dispatch, as well as a copy of the contested resolution issued by the bailiff and received by the claimant or the debtor. The head of the enforcement authority returns the complaint without consideration if, in particular, its form and content are not observed (Part 2, 5 Art. 126, Para. 3 Part 1 Art. 129 of the Law).

In accordance with Part 4 of Art. 48, Part 1 of Art. 360-3 of the Civil Procedure Code, and by virtue of Part 2 of Art. 132 of the Law, complaints against resolutions, actions (inaction) of the bailiff, as well as against resolutions, actions (inaction) of the head of the enforcement authority related to the direct execution of enforcement documents, are submitted to the court at the location of the relevant enforcement authority.

The examination of cases showed that there are cases of incorrect determination of jurisdiction by applicants, since the location of the Enforcement Department does not always correspond to the place where enforcement actions are performed, and therefore, in accordance with Para. 1 of Art. 246 of the Civil Procedure Code, courts refused to initiate cases.

20% of complaints were left without consideration due to the applicants' failure to comply with the preliminary pre-trial appeal procedure.

More than 50% of complaints considered on their merits were found to be justified due to violations of legislation by bailiffs.

For example, the debtor's complaint was deemed justified because the bailiff considered the issue of terminating the enforcement proceedings without proper notification and in his absence.

The debtor's complaint regarding the actions of the enforcement officer, who included property in the inventory and seizure act that cannot be subject to enforcement under executive documents according to the list in the Annex to the Law, was also recognized by the court as justified.

From the complaints about the rulings on the suspension, termination of enforcement proceedings, and return of the executive document, it follows that the applicants consider the specified actions of the enforcement officers as inaction.

At the same time, the inaction of an enforcement officer may be recognized as illegal if they had the opportunity to perform the necessary enforcement actions aimed at the full and timely execution of the requirements of the executive document, but did not do so, thereby violating the rights and legitimate interests of the party to the enforcement proceedings.

It should be borne in mind that a state fee shall be paid for considering complaints against rulings, actions (inaction) of an enforcement officer at the rate specified in subparagraph 2.3 of paragraph 2 of Annex 14 to the Tax Code of the Republic of Belarus, in the amount of 1 base unit.

Head of the Department for Supervision of Compliance with the Law of Judicial Decisions in Civil Cases, Senior Justice Counselor Irina Titkova