International standard of access to justice and subject of civil procedural law

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis of modern approaches to defining the concept of access to justice leads to the urgent need to rethink some classic postulates of the theory of civil procedural law, due to Ukraine's desire to integrate into the European legal space and recognition of the rule of law as a fundamental principle of law in a democratic society. Despite the lack of established views in foreign and domestic literature on the interpretation of the concept of access to justice in civil cases, we can trace certain patterns in this area. The study concludes that a broad approach to the interpretation of the international standard of access to justice in civil cases is appropriate, according to which its elements such as access to justice, access to effective remedies and access to ADR can be distinguished. This approach is based on the idea of procedural pluralism, which is based on the provision of coexistence of multiple forms of protection of violated rights of persons, the effectiveness of which is determined based on the specifics of a particular dispute. Under this approach, the court is recognised as only one of the possible appropriate ways of resolving disputes, along with other ways of resolving disputes.

Nowadays, we can say that the idea of procedural centralism corresponds to the domestic narrow concept of the subject of civil procedural law, and the idea of procedural pluralism - with a broad concept of the subject of civil procedural law. Considering the autonomous interpretation of the term “court” in the practice of the ECHR regarding the interpretation of paragraph 1 of Article 6 of the ECHR, as well as the growing popularity of alternative dispute resolution, it is now advisable to adopt a broad approach to defining the subject of civil procedural law, which should cover both the classical form of judicial protection (civil litigation) and various ADR methods, in particular arbitration, international commercial arbitration, mediation, conciliation, etc. In view of the above, the concepts of civil litigation and civil process do not coincide and are not identical. Civil procedure are a more general concept that encompasses both civil litigation and other jurisdictional procedures for the consideration and resolution of civil cases to protect the subjective rights and interests of disputant.

REFERENCES

[1] Cappelletti, M., Garth, B., & Trocker, N. (1979). Access to justice: the worldwide movement to make rights effective: A general report. Milan: Mohr Siebeck GmbH & Co.

[2] Cappelletti, M. (1993). Alternative dispute resolution processes within the framework of the world-wide access-to-justice movement. The Modern Law Review, 56, 282-296.

[3] The European Convention on Human Rights. (1950). Retrieved from https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/convention_eng.pdf.

[4] Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. (2012). Retrieved from https://eur- lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32003R2201.

[5] Izarova, I., & Horban, N. (2021). About equal access to justice in a contemporary world. Access to Justice in Eastern Europe, 4(2), 5-7.

[6] Lucy, W. (2020). Access to justice and the rule of law. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 40(2), 377-402.

[7] Getman, A. (2021). Access to justice for the protection of environmental rights in Ukraine. Access to Justice in Eastern Europe, 2(10), 118-127.

[8] Brinks, D.M. (2019). Access to what? Legal agency and access to justice for indigenous peoples in Latin America. Journal of Development Studies, 55(3), 348-365.

[9] Sakara, N.Y. (2010). Problems of access to justice in civil cases. Kharkiv: Pravo.

[10] Gerards, J.H., & Glas, L.R. (2017). Access to justice in the European convention on human rights system. Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, 35(1), 11-30.

[11] Weinstein, I. (2016). Access to civil justice in America: What do we know? In S. Estreicher & J. Radice (Eds.), Beyond Elite Law: Access to Civil Justice in America (pp. 3-20). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[12] Tamanaha, B. (2004). On the rule of law. History, politics, theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[13] Omelchuk, O.M., Hrynko, S.D., Ivanovska, A.M., Misinkevych, A.L., & Antoniuk, V.V. (2021). Protection of human rights in the context of the development of the rule of law principle: The international aspect. Journal of the National Academy of Legal Sciences of Ukraine, 28(1), 32-42.

[14] Kochenov, D., Magen, A., & Pech, L. (2016). Introduction: The great rule of law debate in the EU. Journal of Common Market Studies, 54(5), 1045-1049.

[15] European commission for democracy through law (Venice Commission). (2011). Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2011)003rev-e.

[16] Waldron, J. (2008). The concept of the rule of law. Georgia Law Review, 43, 1-61.

[17] Bingham, T. (2011). Rule of law. London: Penguin.

[18] Macdonald, R. (2005). Access to justice in Canada today: scope, scale and ambitions. In J. Bass, W.A. Bogart, & F.H. Zemans (Eds.), Access to justice for a new century: The way forward (pp. 19-112). Toronto: Law Society of Upper Canada.

[19] Woolf, H. (1995). Access to justice: interim report to the Lord Chancellor on the civil justice system in England and Wales. London: Lord Chancellor's Department.

[20] European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice. (2008). Access to justice in Europe. Report prepared by the research team on enforcement of court decisions. Retrieved from https://rm.coe.int/168074827e.

[21] European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice. (2018). European judicial systems - Efficiency and

quality of justice. Retrieved from https://www.coe.int/en/web/cepej/special-

file-publication-2018-edition-of-the-cepej-report-european-judicial-systems-efficiency-and-quality-of-justice-.

[22] European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. (2016). Handbook on European law relating to access to justice. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

[23] Galanter, M. (1981). Justice in many rooms: courts, private ordering and indigenous law. Journal of Legal Pluralizm, 19, 1-48.

[24] Lande, J. (2000). Getting the faith: Why business lawyers and executives believe in mediation. Harvard Negotiation Law Review, 5, 137-231.

[25] Lande, J. (2000). Shifting the focus from the myth of the vanishing trial to complex conflict management systems, or I learned almost everything I need to know about conflict resolution from Marc Galanter. Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution, 6(2), 191-212.

[26] Prytyka, Y., Izarova, I., & Kravtsov, S. (2020). Towards effective dispute resolution: A long way of mediation development in Ukraine. Asia Life Sciences, 29(1), 389-399.

[27] Menkel-Meadow, C. (2021). What is an appropriate measure of litigation? Quantification, qualification and differentiation of dispute resolution. Onati Socio-Legal Series, 11(2), 320-353.

[28] Shumylo, M. (2020). Mediation in labour disputes: Its implementation in Ukraine and the international experience. E-Journal of International and Comparative Labour Studies, 9(2), 44-56.

[29] Constitution of Ukraine. (1996). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/rada/show/254K/96-Bp.

[30] Tatsiy, V.Ya. (Ed.). (2011). Constitution of Ukraine: Scientific and practical commentary. Kharkiv: Pravo.

[31] Yudelson, K.S. (1956). Soviet civil procedure. Moscow: Gosyurizdat.

[32] Getmantsev, O.V. (2011). The content of the subject of civil procedural law: The historical origins of modern doctrines. Scientific Bulletin of Chernivtsi University. Jurisprudence, 559, 71-78.

[33] Zeider, N.B. (1962). The subject and system of Soviet civil procedural law. Jurisprudence, 3, 69-82.

[34] Komarov, V.V. (2017). The doctrine of the subject of civil procedural law. Law of Ukraine, 5, 102-111.

[35] Tsuvina, T.A. (2015). The right to a court in civil procedure. Kharkiv: Slovo.

[36] Eliseikin, P.F. (1974). Subject and principles of Soviet civil procedural law. Yaroslavl: Yaroslavl University Press.

[37] Katz, S.Yu., & Nosko, L.Ya. (Eds.). (1982). Soviet civil process. Kyiv: Vishcha shkola.

[38] Civil Code of Ukraine. (2003). Retrieved from: https://zakon.rada.gov.Ua/-laws/show/435-15#Text.

[39] The Labour Code of Ukraine. (1971). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/322- 08?lang=en#Text.

[40] Law of Ukraine No. 1701-4 “On Arbitration Courts”. (2004). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1618-15#Text.

[41] Law of Ukraine No. 4002-XII “On International Commercial Arbitration”. (1994). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/4038-12#Text.

[42] Kurylev, S.V. (1957). Forms of protection and enforcement of subjective rights and the right to claim. Proceedings of the Irkutsk State University, XXII(3), 159-216.

[43] Decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine in the case on the constitutional petition of 51 Deputies of Ukraine on the constitutionality of the provisions of para. 7, 11 of Art. 2, Art. 3, para. 9 of Art. 4 and Section VIII “Arbitration Self-Government” of the Law of Ukraine “On Arbitration Courts” (case about the tasks of the arbitral tribunal). (2008). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/v001p710-08?lang=en#Text.

Размещено на Allbest.ru