During the consideration by the district court of the case on the protection of honor and dignity, one of the witnesses warned the judge that the answer to the question asked would contain information constituting state secrets. The judge ruled to continue the trial in a closed court session and removed from the courtroom those who were not related to the case in question. The judgment denied the claims.
In a cassation appeal against the decision, the plaintiff asked to cancel the court decision under paragraph 1 of Part 2 of Art. 364 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation as considered by the illegal composition of the court, since decisions on cases involving state secrets can only be made by the supreme courts of the republics, regional, regional courts, courts of cities of federal significance, the autonomous region and autonomous region
The defendant in the explanations for the complaint indicated that the court decision cannot be quashed, since it is lawful in essence, and, in addition, by virtue of Art. 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a case accepted by a court for proceeding with observance of the rules of jurisdiction must be resolved on the merits by this court, even if it later became jurisdictional to another court.
Who is right in this situation?
Evaluate the arguments of the plaintiff and defendant?
Is a violation of jurisdiction a ground for annulment of a court decision if it complies with substantive law?

After payment you will be available a link to the solution of this problem in the file of MS Word. It should be noted that the problem solutions put up for sale were successfully handed over in the period 2004-2019 and could be outdated. However, the general algorithm will always remain true.