Funding of Forensic Psychiatric Evaluations in Cases Concerning Legal Capacity: the Balance Between Private and Public Interests

The current procedure for allocating court costs in cases concerning the legal capacity of citizens contains a systemic flaw: family members who file such petitions – often pursuing private interests – are unjustifiably entitled to reimbursement of their expenses from the federal budget, which leads to unwarranted waste of budget funds and disrupts the balance between private and public interests. Research Objective : To develop a differentiated model for the allocation of court costs in cases falling under this category. The proposed model calls for applicants who are relatives to bear the costs, while maintaining budgetary funding exclusively for cases brought before the court by authorized government agencies and socially vulnerable groups (people with disabilities, children with disabilities). The scientific significance lies in the development of a methodology for allocating court costs in cases involving legal capacity that takes into account the balance of procedural expenses. The practical value of this study lies in its proposals to amend Articles 96 and 284 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation to provide for a differentiated allocation of court costs. Implementing these proposals will ensure a balance of interests and procedural efficiency, and the findings of this study can be used to improve legislation and judicial practice. Case law shows that such cases are more often initiated by relatives rather than in the public interest. The current mechanism for unconditional reimbursement of court costs from the federal budget violates the principle of procedural economy and places an undue burden on the budget. To address this imbalance, a differentiated approach is proposed.