| Abstract [eng] |
The Master's thesis analyses the principle of res iudicata and the institute of re-opening of court proceedings. The first part of the paper explains the concepts of res iudicata and the re-opening of the proceedings, their interaction, and analyses various legal literature, books, articles and other publications. The importance, origins and limits of the application of the principle of res iudicata are explored, as well as the extra-ordinary approach of the re-opening of proceedings. The second part analyses the case law of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania, the Supreme Court of Lithuania, the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania, the European Court of Human Rights and the United Nations Human Rights Committee, which reflects the relationship between the re-opening of judicial proceedings and the principle of res iudicata. The relevance of the principle of res iudicata in case law is demonstrated. It examines how the principle of res iudicata limits the application of the institution of resumption of proceedings. Analyses the trends in the institution of reopening of court proceedings, expanding its application in case law and legislation. An analysis of the case of Varnienė v. Lithuania in the context of the right to a judicial remedy under Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, where the European Court of Human Rights found a violation of the European Convention on Human Rights. The analysis of cases relevant to the topic also reveals how the Courts, in their decision-making process, have to strike a balance between the principle of res iudicata and the values protected by the re-opening of court proceedings. The relationship between the principle of res iudicata and the resumption of proceedings, as reflected in case law, is assessed. |
