Search results

This article provides a review of issues on insignificance of the cases and simplified proceedings as a procedural form of their consideration in the novelized national civil procedural law. Introduced by the changes of October 3, 2017, the novel of the Civil Procedural Code of Ukraine on insignificance of cases causes many discussions, objections and comments, finds both support in scientific societies, and certain criticism. The aforementioned novels aimed to reform this branch of Ukrainian law by bringing it into line with European standards. In this regard, the question whether this goal was achieved arises, and whether the novels in the whole content correspond to European Union law, the rights of individual European continents and the regular practice of the European Court of Human Rights. The paper analyzes the issues related to ensuring the right to a fair trial, access to justice and the right of a person for cassation appeal on insignificant case considering. The study examined the classical and modern doctrine, as it should be emphasized that the views of scientists are an important source of the formation and development of law, and when considering issues such as simplified proceedings and insignificance of disputes, scientific doctrine determines the relevance of this topic. The subject of the study in the work was also a large practice of national courts in solving the issue of insignificance of cases, as well as simplified proceedings. The practice of the European Court of Human Rights, which also formed the subject of this article, was also taken into consideration. The issue of insignificance establishing in the dispute resolution was also disclosed through a prism of the European Union legislation and the legislation of certain European countries. Based on the analysis of the doctrine and legislation of Ukraine and foreign countries, the proposals to amend the Civil Procedural Code of Ukraine with the legal regulation of minor disputes were made in the conclusions.

The article has analyzed the principles which are the basis for settlement of the dispute with participation of judge. Personal arguments regarding reasonableness of closed meetings as a certain form of the procedure for settlement of the dispute with participation of judge have been provided. The authors have concluded that this institute is out of civil procedure. The authors focus on problematic aspects which prevent achievement of efficiency due to the use of the settlement of dispute with participation of judge. Besides, authors draw attention to the lack of special training for the national judges, necessary special training and selection of judges who will become mediators. Reasonableness and negative consequences for a judge who combines settlement procedures with performance of main duties have been analyzed. The author has distinguished between the settlement of the dispute with participation of judge and mediation procedure. Conclusion about differences have been made. The article provides proposals to amendments civil procedure legislation. The authors propose to choose the model of voluntary mediation in the court when this procedure is possible with the consent of parties. Personal opinion on implementation of the institute of the judge-mediator, special registry of these judges, introduction of professional education and selection of these persons has been provided. Besides, it has been concluded that some restrictions should be introduced regarding combination of mediation procedures and main professional obligations by the judge. Moreover, necessity to abolish temporary restrictions for procedure of settling the dispute with participation of judge to avoid excessive formalism and fast decision on the case has been underlined.