THE ISSUE OF THE PREJUDICE OF FACTS ESTABLISHED BY A JUDICIAL ACT THAT ENTERED INTO FORCE IN A PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED CASE

The article examines the problems of the problem of prejudice of facts established by a judicial act that entered into force in a previously considered case. The author explores the problems of prejudice in the aspect of the concept of indisputable circumstances in civil cases. The author's position presupposes a dualistic understanding of indisputable circumstances: narrow - facts that are indisputable by the parties, butor facts, facts of omission; broad - a set of facts that cannot be proved, including, among other things, prejudicial facts. The prejudicial facts are analyzed as grounds for exemption from proof. The purpose, subjective and objective limits of prejudice are substantiated. According to the results of the study, the established law enforcement practice adheres to the position that prejudice applies exclusively to those circumstances that are established in the judicial act that entered into force, have legal significance, and formed part of the subject of evidence in the initial process.