SUMMARY
We seek to understand the definition of legal rules created by national and international courts. We seek to look into the content of legal rules in Russian legal doctrine by classifying them into three groups. The authors consider the importance of historical background of this issue due to the changes in the international judicial system and Russian procedural legislation. We seek to analyze the phenomenon of a legal rule created by the court. We found out that all the legal rules created by courts could be divided into three main groups, depending on the source: the rules fixed in the normative legal acts of the courts; the rules fixed in normative judicial decisions; and customary legal rules approved by the courts. In general, each of the listed groups of rules has its own characteristics, which are much similar to those of by-laws, precedents, and customs respectively. The legal effect of the rules created by the court is various and depends on what body introduces a rule. The authors concluded that the rules fixed in the Resolutions of the Russian Constitutional Court are ranked between constitutional rules and legislative rules. The rules coming from the Russian Supreme Court are ranked between the rules of law and the rules of by-laws. When it comes to the rules created by international courts, two important points must be taken into account. First, international courts, on the one hand, create new rules of international law based on other more general rules and principles. On the other hand, due to the lack of a clear hierarchy of rules in international law, such rules, unlike the norms of by-laws in Russian law, do not have a dependent (subordinate) nature. Second, the principle of the supremacy of the Russian Constitution over international regulations allows us to place international rules between the Russian Constitution and Russian laws. The authors considered that this approach makes it possible to integrate the new category of rules into the general regulatory system. The researchers found out that important characteristics of the rules created by the court are their subsidiary nature and retrospective nature. The rule-making freedom of the court is limited by other applicable legal rules. The court usually creates a rule only in cases where there are no other rules to govern the disputed legal relation. That is why the life of the rules created by the court is often short. When a legislative or executive body adopts another rule on the same issue, the previously created court rule is usually considered to be cancelled. The researchers came to the conclusion that Russian legal experts have no common opinion on the issue of the normative value of the legal provisions developed through the Resolutions of the Plenums of the Supreme Courts of the USSR and the Union Republics. Following a review of the content, we raised possible problems, strategies, suggestions and guidelines for the legal rules created by courts. The authors conclude that the analysis makes it possible to distinguish a special group of rules created by courts. This special group of rules is a regulatory reality that many experts in the field of general theory of law and international law have been paying attention to in recent decades. The authors conclude that the regulation of this area at the legislative level would greatly contribute to strengthening the principle of judicial practice unity. We also point out that the concepts of the legal position and of the rules created by the court can coincide only when the acts of higher judicial bodies are in question. If we consider the concept of the legal position in the broader sense used in practice, it becomes obvious that it also covers other aspects that are in no way rules. When it comes to similar concepts, for example, precedential rules and interpretative rules, they can be considered as varieties of the rules created by courts. The authors come to the conclusion that court decision references to the provisions fixed in the previously adopted judicial acts of the aforementioned judicial bodies have become the legal basis for making a decision. This means that the normative value of judicial acts has been recognized at the legislative level. Otherwise, there is no need for legislative provisions of this sort. The researchers encourage to recognize the phenomenon of a legal rule created by the court, and to differentiate it from other similar concepts used in jurisprudence. The closest to this category is the aforementioned concept of the court's legal positions. The research uses general scientific and special cognitive techniques wherein legal analysis and synthesis, systemic, formal-legal, comparative-legal, historical-legal and dialectical methods are applied.