The article examines the functional purpose of the sub-institute of expenses for professional legal assistance in commercial litigation. The doctrinal positions regarding the functional load of the institute of court costs are analyzed. On this basis, the expediency of distinguishing the functions of the sub-institute of expenses for professional legal assistance, as a component of the institute of court costs, which has a specific subject focus and performs relatively independent tasks within commercial proceedings, is argued. The main functions of this sub-institute are formulated and the content of each of them is revealed, including through the prism of the law enforcement practice of commercial courts. In particular, the existence of a guarantee-compensatory function is substantiated, which integrates the goals of implementing the constitutional right to professional legal assistance with the mechanisms for reimbursing the expenses of the party in whose favor the decision was made in commercial litigation. The procedural-regulatory function is distinguished as one implemented through the normative regulation of the procedure, grounds, and limits of cost compensation. The protective function is clarified, which consists in protecting the subjective rights of a participant in the judicial process by ensuring a fair distribution of the financial burden in connection with the consideration of a case in a commercial court. The presence of an evaluative-criteria function is substantiated, which manifests itself in the formation by the court of standards of legality, reasonableness, and justification of expenses for professional legal assistance. The stimulating function is singled out, associated with the impact of the compensation mechanism on the procedural discipline of the parties and the prevention of abuses of procedural rights. The legal-identification function is highlighted, which distinguishes professional legal assistance as a specific activity in the field of jurisdictional protection of the rights and legitimate interests of individuals and legal entities. It is concluded that the implementation of the mentioned functions should ensure legal certainty, strengthen trust in the judicial system, and contribute to the affirmation of the rule of law.
A. K. Konstantynov (Tue,) studied this question.