Digital Enforcement Proceedings

One of the directions of digitalization is the introduction of digital enforcement proceedings. The paper analyzes the specifics of digital enforcement proceedings in relation to the previous stage of legal protection — judicial and extrajudicial procedures; the problems of eliminating legal and factual errors made at the stage of confirming the right and the compatibility of the mechanism of restitution with digital enforcement proceedings. The compatibility of the current rules of enforcement proceedings with summary digital enforcement proceedings and the risks of additional budget expenditures associated with an imperfect mechanism for a writ of restitution in digital enforcement proceedings are evaluated. There are three ways to enforce proceedings in which information technologies can be involved: simplified foreclosure on funds, foreclosure on other property, foreclosure on digital assets. It is proved that the summary enforcement proceedings applied to monetary penalties should exclude the possibility of recovery through banks and the employer. Based on the analysis of statistical data, it is demonstrated that most of the penalties will require a transition from digital enforcement proceedings to ordinary enforcement proceedings, therefore, a solution is required to regulate the issues of granting a term for voluntary execution, collection of enforcement fees, seizure of property, etc. In ordinary enforcement proceedings, the use of information technology should be aimed at solving the problem of detecting the property of a non-performing debtor; this requires legislative and technological solutions for cross-analysis of information, a single database of information on debt obligations, available funds, the property of a person and their expenses, combined with a base that provides the possibility of applying typical prohibitions, deprivation of typical benefits and privileges. It is concluded that in order to promote national jurisdiction in cross-border disputes, it is necessary to develop the direction of dispute resolution in relation to digital assets, and specific measures for this development are proposed.

1. Gureev VA. Optimization of Enforcement Proceedings and Simplification of Recovery Procedures by the Federal Bailiff Service: Challenges, Problems and Ways to Solve them. Zakony Rossii: opyt, analiz, praktika. 2018;8:3‑9. (In Russ.).

2. Guryev OP. Simplified Enforcement Proceedings: Reflections on the Prerequisites and Content of the Legal Institute. Arbitrazhnyy i grazhdanskiy protsess [Arbitrazh and Civil Procedure]. 2020;12:19-22. (In Russ.).

3. Katukova SYu, Nakhova EA. On the Issue of the Judicial Procedure for Challenging the Executive Inscription. Notarius. 2020;7:45-48. (In Russ.).

4. Kuznetsov EN. The Right to the Execution of Judicial Acts in the Russian Federation. Abstract Dr. Diss. (Law). Ekaterinburg; 2022. (In Russ.).

5. Schmitz M. Enforcement and Digital Resources. In: Prinuditelnoe ispolnenie: sovremennoe sostoyanie i vektory razvitiya = Enforcement: The Current State and Development Vectors. Moscow: Litres Publ.; 2021. (In Russ.).

6. Vasilyeva TA, Varlamova NV. Institutions of Public Power in the context of Globalization. A monograph. Moscow: Norma: Infra‑M Publ.; 2020. (In Russ.).

7. Yarkov VV, Rents IG. The Validity of the Principles of the Notary in the 21st Century: New Challenges. Zakon. 2019;7:30-43. (In Russ.).