Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Advocates and Legal Advisers in Civil Proceedings in Kazakhstan: Is Advocate Monopoly Required? Cover

Advocates and Legal Advisers in Civil Proceedings in Kazakhstan: Is Advocate Monopoly Required?

Open Access
|Apr 2024

References

  1. Abel, R. L. (1985).. Regents of the University of California.
  2. Au, T. I., Kinsfather, A. S. (2019). Problems of improving legislative regulations of the advocate institute in the Republic of Kazakhstan. In(pp. 9–13). Kazan Federal University. Available at https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=41146600.
  3. Bakayanova, N. M. (2015). On the prospects of a lawyer’s monopoly., 10–11(50), 134–140.
  4. Belik, V. N. (2009). Legal aspects of exercise of the constitutional right to competent legal assistance., 7, 106–109.
  5. Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe (2000).. Available at https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?docid=30188533&pos=3;-108#pos=3;-108.
  6. Council of Europe (2018).. CEPEJ studies. Available at https://rm.coe.int/rapport-avec-couv-18-09-2018-en/16808def9c.
  7. Court of Iceland (1998).. Available at https://www.althingi.is/lagas/nuna/1998077.html.
  8. Davis, M. F. (2007). Human rights in the trenches: Using international human rights law in everyday legal assistance cases., 41, 414–426.
  9. Dunlap, B. (2013). Anyone can think like a lawyer: How the lawyers’ monopoly on legal understanding undermines democracy and the rule of law in the United States., 82, 2817–2842.
  10. Federal Chamber of Advocates of the Russian Federation (2018).. FPA. Available at https://fparf.ru/news/fpa/yaponskaya-model-advokatury.
  11. Government of France (1971).. Available at https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/articlelc/LEGIARTI000031008982.
  12. Government of France (2023).. Available at https://www.legi-france.gouv.fr/codes/id/LEGITEXT000006070716.
  13. Gurbanova, N. H., Raspopin, S. V., Yurtaev, N. S., Bardokin, D. A. (2020). Topical issues of competent legal assistance in the post-Soviet space., 3(15), 257–269.
  14. Hagerty, R. J. (2021).. The Wall Street Journal. Available at https://www.wsj.com/articles/professor-aimed-to-break-lawyers-monopoly-on-legal-services-11611932403.
  15. International Bar Association (2014).. International Bar Association: 2014.
  16. Jadalhaq, I. M., Abdulhay, I. E., Alqodsi, E. M., El Maknouzi, M. E. H. (2023). A systematic reviews and meta-analyses of interruption of the statute of limitations for civil claims: A comparative study of Arab legislations., 9(6), 16756. Available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16756.
  17. Kaluzhskikh, D. P. (2017). Lawyer’s monopoly in Russia: Pluses and minuses., 1, 96–99. Available at https://elibrary.ru/download/elibrary_31738555_58442513.pdf.
  18. Kirby, T. (2022).. The Regulatory Review. Available at https://www.theregreview.org/2022/02/09/kirby-piercing-lawyer-monopoly.
  19. Knake, R. N. (2018). The legal monopoly., 93, 1293–1337.
  20. Kratenko, M. V. (2013). Accessibility of legal assistance and some types of contracts on its rendering. In(Vol. 2, pp. 117–121). Novosibirsk.
  21. Lavitskaya, M. I. (2020). Qualified legal assistance in some foreign states: current state and features of its provision. In(pp. 14–21). All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of Documentation and Archival Business. Available at https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=44187659.
  22. Levin, L. C. (2013). The monopoly myth and other tales about the superiority of lawyers., 82, 2611–2634.
  23. Momotov, V. V. (2017). The market of judicial representation: From experience of continental and Anglo-Saxon legal tradition., 4(65), 43–51.
  24. Parliament of Georgia (1997).. Available at https://matsne.gov.ge/ka/document/view/29962?publication=154.
  25. Republic of Belarus (2011).. Available at https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?docid=31101754&pos=5;-108#pos=5;-108.
  26. Republic of Kazakhstan (1995).. Available at https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?docid=1005029.
  27. Republic of Kazakhstan (2007).. Available at https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?docid=30086115.
  28. Republic of Kazakhstan (2014).. Available at https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?docid=31577399.
  29. Republic of Kazakhstan (2015).. Available at https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?docid=34329053.
  30. Republic of Kazakhstan (2017).. Available at https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?docid=39611738.
  31. Republic of Kazakhstan (2018).. Available at https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?docid=33024087.
  32. Republic of Kazakhstan (2021).. Available at https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?docid=37971200&pos=5;-108#pos=5;-108.
  33. Republic of Moldova (2013).. Available at https://www.legis.md/cautare/getResults?docid=133060&lang=ro.
  34. Republic of Moldova (2018).. Available at https://www.legis.md/cautare/getResults?docid=134478&lang=ro#.
  35. Republic of Uzbekistan (2018).. Available at https://lex.uz/docs/-3517337.
  36. Rhode, D. L. (2015).. Oxford University Press.
  37. Riabov, D. (2021). On revocation of the lawyer’s monopoly through introducing the professional institution of legal advisers., 17(3), 155–166. Available at https://doi.org/10.15804/rop2021309.
  38. Sen, G. (2019). Beyond the JD: How eliminating the legal profession’s monopoly on legal services can address the access-to-justice crisis., 22, 121–147.
  39. Solovyov, A. A. (2016). Qualification requirements for representatives in administrative court proceedings (foreign experience)., 2(92), 137–144.
  40. Steinberg, J. K., Carpenter, A. E., Shanahan, C. F., Mark, A. (2020). Judges and the deregulation of the lawyer’s monopoly., 89, 1315–1349.
  41. Suleimenov, M. K. (2021).Available at https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?docid=37756099.
  42. Sultanov, R. R. (2021). Institute of representation in the Republic of Kazakhstan: Problems and prospects. In S. K. Leshchenko (Ed.).(pp. 386–394). Minsk: RIVSH. Available at https://elib.bsu.by/handle/123456789/274319.
  43. Trabucco, L. (2018). Lawyers’ monopoly: think again: The reality of non-lawyer legal service provision in Canada., 96, 460–478.
  44. Vereshchagin, A. N. (2017). About assessing the validity of the advocate monopoly., 2, 152–179.
  45. Zaikov, D. E. (2020). Prohibition of judicial representation: Legal regulation issues and peculiarities of application., 1(40), 155–164.
  46. Zhamburbaeva, S. (2022). Some issues of legislative regulation of the institute of judicial representation in the Republic of Kazakhstan., 1(105), 140–149.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/danb-2024-0002 | Journal eISSN: 1804-8285 | Journal ISSN: 1804-6746 (formerly 1804-8285)
Language: English
Page range: 24 - 46
Published on: Apr 10, 2024
Published by: European Research University
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

© 2024 Sabina Zhamburbayeva, Gulzhazira Ilyassova, published by European Research University
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.