Інститут «amicus curiae» у праві країн англосаксонської правової сім’ї

Abstract

У статті досліджуються питання формування та розвитку інституту експерта з питань права, а також особливості його законодавчого регулювання та функціонування в праві країн англосаксонської правової сім’ї, зокрема, в таких державах, як Велика Британія, Сполучені Штати Америки, Канада та Південно-Африканська Республіка. Встановлено, що нині amicus curiae – це суб’єкт, який не бере участі в судовому процесі як сторона, однак володіє виключними юридичними або професійними знаннями з важливої теми, що має місце в конкретній справі, та пропонує увазі суду певну думку, позицію з того чи іншого питання, що сприяє обґрунтуванню судом своїх мотивів у прийнятті рішення у конкретній, як правило, складній правовій ситуації. The article is devoted to the study of the formation and development of the institute of expert in law, as well as the peculiarities of its legislative regulation and functioning in the law of the Anglo-Saxon legal family, in particular in countries such as the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada and the Republic of South Africa. It has been established that the institute of expert’s in law participation in the trial has deep historical roots and is known in Roman law under the name “amicus curiae”, which literally means “a friend of the court”. Under amicus curiae it could be deemed a person with the relevant professional knowledge in law and professional experience, whose task was to provide the court with relevant information in order to facilitate the consideration and proper resolution of the case in accordance with the legislation in force at that time. The institute of amicus curiae was adopted and developed in the legislation of the Anglo-Saxon legal family from Roman law. The frst confrmation of irs application can be found in the decisions of British courts already in the fourteenth and ffteenth centuries. The “a friend of the court” institute (this is what it refers to as the law of the United Kingdom) rebelled as a third-party institution that did not act in the interests of the procedural parties, but gave legal conclusions on those aspects of the case which the parties did not pay attention to or which they had not notify the court of, emphasizing at the same time the authority and independence of the court, who always posess the fnal decision to accept or reject the expressed position. Under the modern interpretation amicus curiae institute means a subject who does not take part in the trial as a party, but has exclusive legal or professional knowledge of an important topic that occurs in a particular case, and suggests that the court has a certain opinion, a position on this or that question, which promotes justifcation of the court by its motives in making a decision in a specifc, usually diffcult legal situation. It is important to note that the conclusion of “amicus curiae” is not binding on the court, but it gives more necessary information in one or another special area necessary for a fair judgment.