Dynamics in Typology of Decisions Taken by the Constitutional Court of Russian Federation

Sivitsky Vladimir - Professor, Department of Constitutional and Administrative Law, Faculty of Law, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Candidate of Juridical Sciences. Address: 17 Promyshlennaya Str., Saint Petersburg, 198099, Russian Federation. E-mail: Vladimir.Sivitskiy@ksrf.ru.The federal law On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation does not apply the category type of judgement of the RF constitutional Court. Article 71 thereof specifies the types of documents: determination, definition, and decision (in its narrow meaning). Within this type, one can find groups of decisions on their purposes, legal terms of acceptance or stages of adopting. These groups are recommended to name the types of decisions of the RF Constitutional Court. The types of the decisions have remained the same since the adoption of the current law On the Constitutional Court. This typology is more flexible. As the major changes in the typology of the Constitutional Court decisions, the attention is drawn to the following: type of determinations of the RF Constitutional Court adopted without debates which is provided by the changes in the Russian legislation enabling to consider some cases in the RF Constitutional Court without public hearing; removal of the decisions adopted by the Constitutional court chambers. Since 2011, all the cases have been studied by the entire Court banc; absence in the Constitutional Court practice of the determinations which admit a norm as unconstitutional. As a rule, a norm is recognized unconstitutional partly; disappearance of the Constitutional Court Decisions with “positive content” revealing constitutional law essence of the norm; emergence of definitions on discontinuing correspondence with the claimant in the event of the additional address to the Constitutional Court the decision on which was made. Before, such decisions were made by the head of the Constitutional Court administration. The new rules provide an additional insurance of the judicial protection of the rights of the claimant.