Among the numerous novels of the new Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine (CCP of Ukraine) characterized by certain difficulty of law application, of particular interest is the so-called institute of “minor cases” which has never been typical for the court practice. However, it is crucial to understand it correctly, primarily because courts of all levels should apply it at all stages of the civil process (and independently of each other), including the court of cassation, which is the Supreme Court. As it is known, one of the priorities during the reform of procedural legislation was reasonable simplification, efficiency and differentiation of the process, including the cassation procedure. It is no secret that the problem of cassation review, namely an utter overload firstly of the Supreme Court of Ukraine and subsequently of the courts of cassation, stemmed from the so-called universality of cassation appeal exceeding the boundaries of the weighted need for the cassation court to perform the task of ensuring the correct and uniform application by courts of the provisions of substantive and procedural law, and unavailability of any filters of cassation review. At the same time, the earlier order (procedure) of the cassation proceedings was inconsistent with the mission of the supreme judicial body of the State as the body meant to ensure the correct and uniform application of the provisions of substantive and procedural law by courts, since actually it has been equalized in powers with local and appellate courts, because at the cassation level the court, along with having to adjudicate any case on the merits, also had to decide on the procedural issues not directly relevant to the subject matter of the dispute. It is for this reason that there was a need for optimization of the procedures of cassation appeal against legally binding court decisions through the introduction of a system of “filters” and the procedure of admission of a cassation appeal to review by a court of cassation, and also for fitting the powers of the cassation court within reasonable limits. The purpose of the article is to analyze whether it is efficient at the cassation review stage to apply such a novel of civil procedural law as refusal to open cassation proceedings owing to submission of a cassation appeal against court decisions in minor cases, and also to identify the areas of concern in law application and the ways to solve them.
List of legal documents
1. Pro vykonannia rishen ta zastosuvannia praktyky Yevropeiskoho sudu z prav liudyny
[On Implementation of Judgments and Application of Case Law of the European
Court of Human Rights]: Zakon Ukrainy [the Law of Ukraine] vid 23 liutoho 2006 r.
№ 3477-IV. URL: http://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/3477-15 (accessed: 30.09.2018)
2. Rekomendatsiia R (95) 5 Komitetu ministriv derzhavam-chlenam shchodo vvedennia
v diiu ta polipshennia funktsionuvannia system i protsedur oskarzhennia u tsyvilnykh
i torhovelnykh spravakh [Recommendation R (95) 5 of the Committee of Ministers
to Member States Concerning the Introduction and Improvement of the Functioning
of Appeal Systems and Procedures in Civil and Commercial Cases]: Rekomendatsiia
Rady Yevropy [Recommendation of the Council of Europe] vid 7 liutogo 1995 r.
URL: http://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/994_153 (accessed: 30.09.2018) (in Ukrainian).
3. Tsyvilnyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy [The Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine]:
Zakon Ukrainy [the Law of Ukraine] vid 18 bereznia 2004 r. № 1618-IV (v red. Zakonu
Ukrainy vid 3 zhovtnia 2017 r. № 2147-VIII). URL: http://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/
show/1618-15 (accessed: 30.09.2018) (in Ukrainian).
4. Brualla Gomez de la Torre v. Spain: Court Judgment 19.12.1997. App. 26737/95 <http://
hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-58127> accessed 30 September 2018 (in English).
5. Levages Prestations Services v. France: Court Judgment 23.10.1996. App. 21920/93
<http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-58065> accessed 30 September 2018 (in English).
6. Ukhvala Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu u skladi Verkhovnoho Sudu [Ruling of the Civil
Court of Cassation within the Supreme Court] vid 13 kvitnia 2018 r. № 750/5164/17.
URL: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/73500475 (accessed: 30.09.2018) (in Ukrainian).
7. Ukhvala Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu u skladi Verkhovnoho Sudu [Ruling of the Civil
Court of Cassation within the Supreme Court] vid 19 bereznia 2018 r. № 475/459/17.
URL: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/72850603 (accessed: 30.09.2018) (in Ukrainian).
8. Ukhvala Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu u skladi Verkhovnoho Sudu [Ruling of the Civil
Court of Cassation within the Supreme Court] vid 26 bereznia 2018 r. № 331/1664/17.
URL: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/73001076 (accessed: 30.09.2018) (in Ukrainian).
9. Ukhvala Kasatsiinoho tsyvilnoho sudu u skladi Verkhovnoho Sudu [Ruling of the Civil
Court of Cassation within the Supreme Court] vid 5 lypnia 2018 r. № 461/12597/15-
ц. URL: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/75186430 (accessed: 30.09.2018)
10. Komarov V, Tsyvilne protsesualne zakonodavstvo u dynamitsi rozvytku ta praktytsi
Verkhovnoho Sudu Ukrainy [Civil Procedural Legislation in the Development Dynamics
and in the Practice of the Supreme Court of Ukraine] (Pravo 2012) (in Ukrainian).
11. Holubieva N (red), Tsyvilne protsesualne pravo Ukrainy: navchalnyi posibnyk [Law of
Civil Procedure of Ukraine: Teaching Manual] (2018) (in Ukrainian).
12. Monaienko A, ‘Kasatsiini “filtry”: deiaki pytannia dopusku dlia perehliadu sudovykh
rishen VS’ [‘Cassation “Filters”: Some Issues of Admission for Court Decision Review
by the Supreme Court’] (2018) 31 Yurydychna hazeta 22-24 (in Ukrainian).
13. Komarov V, ‘Tsyvilnyi protses u hlobalnomu konteksti’ [‘Civil Process in the Global
Context’] (2011) 10 Pravo Ukrainy 23 (in Ukrainian).
14. Kurylo M, ‘Nauka tsyvilnoho protsesu na mezhi stolit: narys rozvytku idei yednosti
protsesu’ [‘The Science of Civil Process at the Turn of Centuries: an Essay on the
Development of the Process Unity Idea’] (2011) 10 Sudova apeliatsiia 23 (in Ukrainian).
15. Hulko B, ‘Maloznachni spravy u praktytsi Verkhovnoho Sudu’ [‘Minor Cases in
the Supreme Court Practice’] (2018) 12-14 Sudebno-iurydycheskaia hazeta 11-12
16. Drobotova T ta Zuievych L, ‘Protsesualni filtry’ [‘Procedural Filters’] (Zakon i
Biznes, 17 Serpen 2018) <http://zib.com.ua/ua/print/134066-obmezhennya_prava_
na_kasaciyne_oskarzhennya_u_novomu_gpk.html> accessed 30 September 2018
17. Hrushytskyi A, ‘Rozghliad “po-sproshchenomu”’ [‘Proceedings in a “Simplified
Manner”’] (Zakon i biznes, 15-21 Veresen 2018) <https://zib.com.ua/ua/print/134471-
koli_spravi_neznachnoi_skladnoschi_stayut_maloznachnimi_.html> accessed 30 Septem
ber 2018 (in Ukrainian).
18. Lesko A, ‘Maloznachnist sprav tsyvilnoi yurysdyktsii yak kryterii dlia yikh rozghliadu
u sproshchenomu pozovnomu provadzhenni ta vidmovy u vidkrytti kasatsiinoho
provadzhennia’ [‘Minor Nature of Civil Jurisdiction Cases as a Criterion for
Adjudication Thereof by the Simplified Proceedings and for a Refusal to Open
the Cassation Proceedings’] (Tsenzor.NET, 29 lystopada 2017) <https://censor.net.
rozglyadu_u_sproschenomu_pozovnomu_provadjenn> accessed 30 September 2018