СУДЕБНАЯ ОШИБКА, ДЕФЕКТЫ ВСТУПИВШЕГО В ЗАКОННУЮ СИЛУ СУДЕБНОГО АКТА И ПЕРЕСМОТР ПО ВНОВЬ ОТКРЫВШИМСЯ И НОВЫМ ОБСТОЯТЕЛЬСТВАМ

Abstract

Abstract

This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the relationship between judicial error, defects of final judicial decisions, and the institution of review of final judgments based on newly discovered and new circumstances. It examines the principal doctrinal approaches to the concept of judicial error and proposes a refined definition based on two constitutive elements: the court's culpable conduct and the causal link between a violation of substantive or procedural law and the erroneous outcome of the case. The study introduces a threefold typology of defects in final judicial decisions, enabling a clear distinction between appellate (instance-based) review and the extraordinary review based on newly discovered and new circumstances. It further substantiates the introduction of the concept of an objective error of law as an independent category of legal defect revealed ex post through constitutional or Convention-based review. The article demonstrates that the concepts of judicial error and the grounds for review based on newly discovered and new circumstances partially overlap rather than coincide or remain entirely separate. It also argues that the principle of legal certainty functions as an internal criterion for determining the scope of the reviewing court's powers. The findings may contribute to the further development of the civil procedural legislation of the Republic of Armenia, judicial practice, and future scholarly research.