Оn the use of criminal proceedings materials in commercial litigation

This article is dedicated to a comprehensive examination of the procedural aspects of using materials from criminal proceedings in commercial litigation. In light of the growing number of cases where commercial and criminal law elements intersect, the study emphasizes the need for cautious and well-founded use of evidence obtained within the framework of criminal procedure in matters under commercial jurisdiction. The article analyzes key concepts such as evidence, admissibility, burden of proof, and compares how these institutions are treated in both criminal and commercial proceedings. It was determined that it is necessary to establish legal mechanisms that would allow the use of criminal proceedings materials to be reconciled with the different procedures of commercial proceedings, as well as to prevent the use in commercial proceedings of premature conclusions of preliminary investigations that may distort the objectives of commercial proceedings. In particular, given the practical necessity of using certain materials of criminal proceedings in commercial proceedings, it seems appropriate to establish a regulatory mechanism for the request of documents by a commercial court in cases where they are essential for resolving a dispute on the basis of a ruling that should be mandatory for consideration by the pre-trial investigation body or the prosecutor’s office. The article proposes legislative amendments, including supplementing Article 81 of the CPCU with a provision enabling commercial courts to request materials from criminal proceedings with a mandatory response from pre-trial investigation bodies, and–should a refusal occur–allowing for an appeal mechanism. Special attention is given to the issue of admissibility of evidence obtained under the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine (CPC), particularly in cases where the procedure for disclosing pre-trial investigation data under Article 222 CPC has not been followed. The authors argue that such procedural violations should not automatically render the evidence inadmissible, but must be considered during its evaluation according to the standards of the Commercial Procedure Code of Ukraine (CPCU): relevance, admissibility, credibility, and sufficiency. It is also substantiated that records of investigative (search) actions that have not been assessed within criminal proceedings cannot be deemed admissible evidence in commercial litigation without a thorough review of their reliability, given the limited ability of the parties to influence their content. The need for consistency in judicial practice and doctrinal justification of admissibility criteria is emphasized. The conclusions of the article are of both theoretical and practical importance for the development of a consistent and balanced approach to the application of law.