The Legal Nature and Content of the “Presumption”of Illicit Origin of Property

Authors

  • Tigran Markosyan Yerevan State University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46991/BYSU.C/2024.15.2.173

Keywords:

civil confiscation, proceedings for confiscation of property of illicit origin, in rem, judicial proof, burden of proof, presumption, hypothesis, rebuttal, balance of probabilities, preponderance of the evidence

Abstract

The civil confiscation proceedings is a novelty in Armenian legal system and the comprehensive study of both complex and individual issues hold significant relevance.

In this regard, the issues of the presumption of illegal origin of property is of particular importance, as its proper application is crucial for achieving a balance between public and private interests, as well as for ensuring human rights protection.

This work is based on international documents, domestic legislation, and procedural studies, outlining the general proceedings for confiscating property deemed to have an illicit origin, its stages, the nature of evidentiary presumptions and their procedural significance, the conditions under which the presumption of illegal origin is applied, and the implications of this presumption. It also addresses the concept of "balancing of probabilities" relevant to these proceedings, or the criterion of "preponderance of evidence."

In conclusion, the findings presented in this article may provide valuable insights for the ongoing development of legal practice and the refinement of existing regulations.

Author Biography

  • Tigran Markosyan, Yerevan State University

    PhD in Law, Associate Professor at YSU Chair of Civil Procedure, Lecturer-
    Coordinator at the Legal Clinic of YSU Faculty of Law, Member of the Commission for the Qualification of the Bankruptcy Managers, Member of the Competition Protection Commission of the RA

References

Щедрин Н.В. Проблемы и перспективы криминализации незаконного обогащения публичных

должностных лиц // Имущественные отношения в Российской Федерации, Право, 2018, էջեր 63-

։

Теодор Гринберг, Линда Сэмюэль, Вингейт Грант, Ларисса Грей, Возврат похищенных

активов: Руководство по конфискации активов вне уголовного производства; Пер. с англ. — М.:

Альпина Паблишерз, 2010, էջեր 35-36։

Resolution 2218, Fighting organised crime by facilitating the confiscation of illegal assets, adopted by

the Parliamentary Assembly on 26 April 2018 (17th Sitting), 3։

Использование ареста и конфискации без вынесения обвинительного приговора․ Совет

Европы, 2021, էջ 10։

Теодор Гринберг, Линда Сэмюэль, Вингейт Грант, Ларисса Грей, Возврат похищенных

активов: Руководство по конфискации активов вне уголовного производства; Пер. с англ. — М.:

Альпина Паблишерз, 2010, էջ 35։

Жан-Пьер Брюн, Ларисса Грей, Кевин Стивенсон, Клайв Скотт; Руководство по возврату

активов для специалистов-практиков, Пер. с англ. — М.: Альпина Паблишер, 2012, էջեր 28-29,

-163։

Venice Commission, CDL-AD(2022)048, Amicus curiae Brief for the Constitutional Court of Armenia

on certain questions relating to the Law on the Forfeiture of Assets of Illicit Origin, adopted by the

Venice Commission at its 133rd Plenary Session (Venice, 16-17 December 2022), կետ 25։

Довидас Виткаускас, Григорий Диков․ Защищая право на справедливое судебное

разбирательство, предусмотренное Европейской конвенцией по правам человека. - М.:

Развитие правовых систем, 2018, էջեր 133-138։

Resolution 2218, Fighting organised crime by facilitating the confiscation of illegal assets, adopted by

the Parliamentary Assembly on 26 April 2018 (17th Sitting), 3։

Վճռաբեկ դատարանի թիվ ԵԴ/10332/02/20 քաղաքացիական գործով 2021 թվականի դեկտեմբերի 30-ի որոշում։

Մեղրյան Ս․Գ․ Ապացուցումը և ապացույցները Հայաստանի Հանրապետության քաղաքացիական դատավարությունում / Եր.,

Արդարադատության ակադեմիա, 2020, էջեր 105-106, 111։

Мильков П․И․, Жагорина С․А․ Доказательственные презумпции в гражданском и арбитражном

процессе: теоретический аспект // Вестник Нижегородского университета им. Н. И.

Лобачевского, Право, 2011, էջ 285։

Зацепина О.Е. Классификация правовых презумпций // Актуальные проблемы российского

права, Право, էջ 84։

Vahe Hovhannisyan, Tigran Markosyan. The institutional features of the judicial over-sight on the

legitimacy of the "pre-judicial" phase of the proceedings for confiscation of property of illicit origin //

Bulletin of Yerevan University C: Jurisprudence, 2 (39) 2023, էջ 178։

Venice Commission, CDL-AD(2022)048, Amicus curiae Brief for the Constitutional Court of Armenia

on certain questions relating to the Law on the Forfeiture of Assets of Illicit Origin, adopted by the

Venice Commission at its 133rd Plenary Session (Venice, 16-17 December 2022), կետ 33։

Directive 2014/42/EU of The European Parliament and of The Council of 3 April 2014 on the freezing

and confiscation of instrumentalities and proceeds of crime in the European Union։

Venice Commission, CDL-AD(2022)048, Amicus curiae Brief for the Constitutional Court of Armenia

on certain questions relating to the Law on the Forfeiture of Assets of Illicit Origin, adopted by the

Venice Commission at its 133rd Plenary Session (Venice, 16-17 December 2022), կետ 23։

Published

2024-12-24

Issue

Section

Civil Procedure

How to Cite

Markosyan, T. (2024). The Legal Nature and Content of the “Presumption”of Illicit Origin of Property. Bulletin of Yerevan University C: Jurisprudence, 15(2 (41), 173-183. https://doi.org/10.46991/BYSU.C/2024.15.2.173