{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0245520902455209, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0026542800265428003, 'mean_word_length': 5.155102040816327, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
DOES A COMPETENCE (NOT JURISDICTION) EXIST NOW? (TEACHING, SCIENCE, PRACTICE)

The article is devoted to the legal institution and the definition of “competence” and the related institution and the definition of “jurisdiction”. Using historical, comparative, system- structural and other methods of cognition, the author analyzes the doctrinal content and consolidation in legislation of these institutions in their development. The relevance of the research topic is justified by the fact that in the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and in the Commercial Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the term “competence” is now not used. The author substantiates the point of view that this does not mean the loss of the meaning of the definition for science, legal education and judicial practice. Taking into account the provisions of the new legislation, an algorithm for determining the competence and jurisdiction of a legal case is proposed. As one of the conclusions, the author points out that there are no grounds for refusing to use the concept of “jurisdiction” either in practice, or in the science of civil and arbitration proceedings, or in the process of teaching these disciplines. In addition, the researcher notes that the analysis of judicial practice since the beginning of 2020 shows that the courts continue to actively use the term “jurisdiction”, both referring to the decisions of the plenums of the RF Supreme Court and the RF Supreme Arbitration Court, and directly.