Legal status of a psychologist as a participant in civil proceedings

Context and relevance. The current procedural legislation does not pay enough attention to the grounds and forms of participation of a psychologist in civil proceedings. The system of subjects of civil proceedings should be improved taking into account changes in legislation and the complication of substantive legal relations. Objective. To identify the features of participation of a psychologist in civil proceedings and propose to adjust the legislation taking this into account. Results. In the order of civil proceedings, a large number of cases are considered with the participation of socially vulnerable citizens, who are characterized in science and judicial practice as the "weak party to the dispute". Such subjects are minors, incapacitated or partially incapacitated citizens, employees in disputes with employers. Despite this, the current Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation does not single out a psychologist either among the persons participating in the case, or in the system of persons assisting in the administration of justice. It is shown that a psychologist participates in the consideration of civil cases in two forms: as a person participating in the case, by virtue of which he should be granted the general procedural rights enshrined in Art. 35 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, and as an expert. It is proposed to establish mandatory participation of a psychologist during the interrogation of a minor. The conclusion of a psychologist as an expert may be judicial or extrajudicial, but in any case it is evidence in the case.

1. Ananyeva, Zh.N., Ananyeva, E.O. (2024). The role of a psychologist in court proceedingsand compliance with ethical standards. Law and State: The Theory and Practice, 12(240), 407—410. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.47643/1815-1337_2024_12_407
2. Golmsten, A.Kh. (1913). Textbook of Russian civil procedure (5th ed.). Saint Petersburg: Tipografiya M. Merkusheva. (In Russ.).
3. Marder, L.D. (2013). Experience of forensic psychological examination on the education and place of residence of children: risks measurement. Psychology and Law, 3(1), Article 8. (In Russ.). URL: https://psyjournals.ru/en/journals/psylaw/archive/2013_n1/58330 (viewed: 16.08.2025).
4. Markovicheva, E.V., Tatyanina, L.G. (2017). Problems of participation of educators and psychologists in criminal procedure. Bulletin of Udmurt University. Series Economics and Law, 27(2), 133—138. (In Russ.). URL: https://elibrary.ru/ylfuez (viewed: 16.08.2025).
5. Petrovskaya, M.S. (2011). The teacher and the psychologist in the system of parties to a trial. Vestnik of Samara State University, 1-2(82), 235—241. (In Russ.). URL: https://elibrary.ru/puzfnb (viewed: 16.08.2025).
6. Rusakovskaya, O.A., Safuanov, F.S., Kharitonova, N. (2011). Current issues of experts' participation in child custody in the event of parents' separation. Psychology and Law, 1(1), Article 5. (In Russ.). URL: https://psyjournals.ru/en/journals/psylaw/archive/2011_n1/39325 (viewed: 16.08.2025).
7. Syomik, A.A. (2014). Judicial-psychological expert operation and ensuring the human rights in civil process. Law and Practice, 2, 105—113. (In Russ.). URL: https://elibrary.ru/tfbylt (viewed: 16.08.2025).
8. Solokhin, A.E. (2024). Judicial conciliation procedure in arbitral procedure: issues of theory and practice: Diss. Cand. of Law. Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Moscow. (In Russ.). URL: https://elibrary.ru/dtmzgi (viewed: 16.08.2025).
9. Shakaryan, M.S. (2014). Selected works. Saint Petersburg: Izdatel'skiy Dom R. Aslanova “Yuridicheskiy Tsentr”. (In Russ.).
10. Shestakova, L.A. (2013). Problems and prospects of juvenile jurisdiction according to the CCP RF. Vestnik of Samara State University, 5(106), 239—244. (In Russ.). URL: https://elibrary.ru/ritvkj (viewed: 16.08.2025).