Разграничение подведомственности (компетенции) между судами, рассматривающими гражданские дела, и судами, рассматривающими экономические дела, в Республике Беларусь

1. Terminological and legal framework (status as of August 21, 2026)

Since January 1, 2026, the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Belarus dated March 11, 2024, No. 359-З (hereinafter referred to as the CPC) has been in effect, simultaneously repealing both the Civil Procedure Code of 1999 and the Commercial (Economic) Procedure Code of 1998. A unified civil procedure has been established, within which all courts—district (city) courts, regional (Minsk City) courts, economic courts of regions (city of Minsk), the newly established Appellate Economic Court, and the Supreme Court—form a unified system of courts of general jurisdiction (Article 112-1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Belarus, Code on the Judiciary and the Status of Judges dated June 29, 2006, No. 139-З).

Formally, the categories of "subject jurisdiction" and "jurisdiction" have been redistributed. Subject jurisdiction (clause 17, Article 1 of the CPC) is now understood as the delineation of competence between the Constitutional Court, courts of general jurisdiction, arbitration courts, and other bodies. The delineation of cases between "general" (civil) and economic courts is carried out through jurisdiction, including generic jurisdiction (Articles 43–46 of the CPC). The essence of the previously existing delineation of subject jurisdiction between district courts and economic courts has been preserved.

2. General Rule on Subject Jurisdiction (Article 39 of the CPC)

According to Article 39 of the CPC, courts, in civil proceedings, consider and resolve cases involving citizens, including individual entrepreneurs, legal entities, the Republic of Belarus and its administrative-territorial units, state bodies, and officials, regarding the protection of violated or disputed rights, freedoms, or legitimate interests, unless their protection is carried out by other bodies and organizations in accordance with legislative acts. Courts have jurisdiction over disputes arising from civil, family, labor, housing, financial, land, and other legal relationships, cases of order proceedings, cases arising from administrative and other public legal relationships, and cases of special proceedings.

3. Jurisdiction of Cases to Economic Courts (Article 45 of the CPC)

Part 1 of Article 45 of the CPC: economic courts, as the court of first instance, consider cases subject to the jurisdiction of courts related to entrepreneurial and other economic activities (except for cases under the jurisdiction of other courts), with the participation of legal entities, individual entrepreneurs, the Republic of Belarus and its administrative-territorial units, state bodies, and officials, and in cases provided for by the CPC and other legislative acts—organizations that are not legal entities and other citizens.

Part 2 of Article 45 of the CPC: regardless of the composition of participants, economic courts consider cases related to entrepreneurial and other economic activities:

1. arising from the application of terms of incorporation and (or) participation in a legal entity (corporate disputes);
2. on the protection of business reputation;
3. related to the creation, reorganization, state registration, and liquidation (termination of activity) of legal entities and individual entrepreneurs;
4. on insolvency or bankruptcy, as well as disputes related to insolvency or bankruptcy;
5. other cases in cases provided for by legislative acts.

Parts 3 and 4 of Article 45 of the CPC: cases are considered by economic courts of regions (city of Minsk), with the exception of cases under the jurisdiction of the Appellate Economic Court (in particular, disputes between administrative-territorial units, cases containing state secrets) and the Supreme Court.

4. Residual Jurisdiction of District (City) Courts (Articles 43, 44, 46 of the CPC)

According to Article 43 of the CPC, district (city) courts consider all other civil cases as the court of first instance—primarily disputes involving citizens that are not related to the implementation of entrepreneurial activities (family, housing—except cases of special jurisdiction of economic courts, labor, inheritance, consumer protection disputes, etc.).

Article 44 of the CPC establishes the jurisdiction of cases to regional (Minsk City) courts (liquidation of public associations and foundations, disputes about the illegality of strikes, international adoption, cases containing state secrets, etc.); moreover, according to point 13, part 1, Article 44 of the CPC, cases on the recognition and enforcement of decisions of foreign courts and arbitration courts where the participant in the relationship is a citizen are under the jurisdiction of the regional court, and not the economic court.

According to Article 46 of the CPC, the Supreme Court considers, as the court of first instance, disputes between the Republic of Belarus and administrative-territorial units, cases in the field of intellectual property, challenging of decisions of the patent authority, the antimonopoly body, the Central Election Commission, etc.

5. Criteria for Delineation

As before (cf. the repealed Articles 37 of the CPC of 1999 and 39, 41, 47 of the Commercial Procedure Code of 1998) and as confirmed by judicial practice of the Supreme Court, delineation is carried out based on the cumulative application of two criteria:

• subject matter (generic)—the nature of the activity from which the dispute arose: whether it is related to entrepreneurial and other economic activity;
• subject-based—the composition of the participants: legal entities and individual entrepreneurs, on the one hand, and citizens who are not individual entrepreneurs, on the other.

Therefore: a dispute of an individual entrepreneur arising from entrepreneurial activity is considered by an economic court, while the same entrepreneur's labor (as an employee), family, or consumer dispute is considered by a general court; disputes between legal entities that are not related to entrepreneurship (for example, on the protection of business reputation) are considered by economic courts based on the rules of special jurisdiction.

6. Procedural Resolution Rules

• Subject jurisdiction is determined by the judge accepting the case for proceedings; a case accepted in compliance with the rules of subject jurisdiction is resolved on the merits, even if it subsequently becomes outside the subject jurisdiction of the court (Article 40 of the CPC);
• If several related claims are made that are inseparable, all claims are subject to consideration by the court (Article 40 of the CPC);
• Disputes over subject jurisdiction between courts are not allowed; filing a statement of claim in violation of these rules results in a refusal to initiate proceedings (Article 246 of the CPC) or the return of the statement of claim (Article 244 of the CPC), and if discovered after the initiation of proceedings—its termination.

Conclusion: the current delineation is based on a combination of the subject matter criterion (connection of the case with entrepreneurial and other economic activity) and the subject-based criterion (composition of participants), embodied in the norms on generic jurisdiction of Articles 43–46 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Belarus, with special categories of cases (corporate, bankruptcy, business reputation, creation and liquidation of commercial entities) under the jurisdiction of economic courts, regardless of the composition of participants.