For a long period of time, abuse of procedural rights by parties to civil proceedings and the fictitious nature of procedural actions resulting from such abuse remains an urgent issue, given the imperfection of current procedural legislation and low legal culture of the general public. The purpose of this article is to investigate the legal nature of civil procedural rights abuse, to mark out and describe its characteristics, and also to formulate the definition of this concept. The author proves that in case of abuse of a right, the fictitious nature of the proceedings may be indicated by the procedural actions and functions which contradict the objectives and purpose of civil proceedings. Arguments are given to demonstrate that abuse of a right may not be regarded as a civil tort, since the issue of qualification of certain actions as abuse of a right and the issue of tort liability for damage caused by such actions have different nature. It is proved that, firstly, the interdisciplinary understanding of the said fictitious nature allows arriving at the conclusion about impossibility of abuse in the form of omission, and secondly, a relevant person should realize the fact of procedural right abuse, and such actions should be his/her conscious choice, and if the said person does not have an illegitimate purpose when making certain procedural actions which under other circumstances would qualify as an abuse of procedural rights, his/her actions may not be recognized as an abuse of procedural rights. Abuse of a procedural right is characterized by the following signs: the person has a specific procedural right at the moment of abusing it; the person realizes the fact of procedural right abuse; it may be made only by action; the exercise of procedural rights formally complies with the requirements of law, however, these rights are exercised contrary to the purpose with which they are granted to parties to the proceedings and contrary to the objectives and purpose of civil proceedings; it is not a civil tort. Therefore, abuse of a procedural right is an exercise of procedural rights contrary to the purpose and objectives of civil proceedings, and also to the purpose of relevant procedural rights granted to a person; this entails the fictitious nature of respective proceedings which negatively affect public interests in the efficient and fair administration of justice in civil matters, as well as private interests of parties to the proceedings.

List of legal documents

Legislation

1. Tsyvilnyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy [The Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy [Law of Ukraine] vid 18 bereznia 2004 r. № 1618-IV (v redaktsii Zakonu Ukrainy [As Amended by the Law of Ukraine] vid 3 zhovtnia 2017 r. № 2147-VIII). URL: http://zakon5.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1618-15 (accessed: 05.02.2018) (in Ukrainian).

2. Tsyvilnyi kodeks Ukrainy [The Civil Code of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy [Law of Ukraine] vid 16 sichnia 2003 r. № 435-IV. URL: http://zakon5.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/435-15 (accessed: 06.02.2018) (in Ukrainian).

3. Simeinyi kodeks Ukrainy [The Family Code of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy [Law of Ukraine] vid 10 sichnia 2002 r. № 2947-III. URL: http://zakon5.rada.gov.ua/laws/ show/2947-14 (accessed: 06.02.2018) (in Ukrainian).

4. Kryminalnyi kodeks Ukrainy [The Criminal Code of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy [Law of Ukraine] vid 5 kvitnia 2001 r. № 2341-III. URL: http://zakon5.rada.gov.ua/laws/ show/2341-14 (accessed: 06.02.2018) (in Ukrainian).

Bibliography

Authored books

5. Abolonin V, Zloupotreblenie pravom na isk v grazhdanskom processe Germanii [Abuse of the Right to Sue in the Civil Process in Germany] (Volters Kluver 2009) (in Russian).

6. Gribanov V, Osushhestvlenie i zashhita grazhdanskih prav [Exercise and Protection of Civil Rights] (Statut 2001) (in Russian).

7. Judin A, Zloupotreblenie processual’nymi pravami v grazhdanskom sudoproizvodstve [Abuse of Procedural Rights in Civil Proceedings] (Izdatel’skij Dom S-Peterb gos un-ta, Izdatel’stvo juridicheskogo fakul’teta S-Peterb gos un-ta 2005) (in Russian).

8. Malinovskij A, Zloupotreblenie pravom [Abuse of Right] (MZ-Press 2002) (in Russian).

9. Polianskyi T, ‘Fenomen zlovzhyvannia pravom (zahalnoteoretychne doslidzhennia)’ [‘The Abuse of Right Phenomenon (General Theoretical Research)’] (2012) 25 Pratsi Lvivskoi laboratorii prav liudyny i hromadianyna Naukovo-doslidnoho instytutu derzhavnoho budivnytstva ta mistsevoho samovriaduvannia Natsionalnoi akademii pravovykh nauk Ukrainy Doslidzhennia ta referaty [Works by the Lviv Laboratory on Human and Citizen’s Rights at the Scientific Research Institute for State-Building and Local Self-Government of the Academy of Legal Sciences of Ukraine Studies and Abstract] (in Ukrainian).

10. Protasov V, Teorija gosudarstva i prava Problemy teorii prava i gosudarstva: uchebnoe posobie [Theory of State and Law Issues of the Theory of State and Law: Training Manual] (2-e izd, Jurajt 2001) (in Russian).

Edited books

11. Komarov V ta Rozhnov O, ‘Protsesualni stroky ta efektyvnist tsyvilnoho sudochynstva’ [‘Procedural Time Limits and the Efficiency of Civil Judicial Procedure’] v Komarov V (red), Tsyvilne sudochynstvo Ukrainy: osnovni zasady ta instytuty: monohrafiia [Civil Judicial Procedure of Ukraine: Basic Foundations and Institutions: Monograph] (Pravo 2016) (in Ukrainian).

12. Koziubra M (red), Zahalna teoriia prava: pidruchnyk [General Theory of Law: Textbook] (Vaite 2015) (in Ukrainian).

Journal articles

13. Abolonin V, ‘Fiktivnye sudebnye processy – nereshennaja problema grazhdanskogo processual’nogo prava’ [‘Sham Litigation – Unresolved Problem of Civil Procedure Law’] (2011) 5 Rossijskij sud’ja 5 (in Russian).

14. Barmina O, ‘K voprosu o zloupotreblenii pravami v arbitrazhnom processe’ [‘On the Issue of Abuse of Rights in the Arbitration Proceedings’] (2012) 10 Arbitrazhnyj i grazhdanskij process 6 (in Russian).

15. Ismagilov R, ‘Zloupotreblenie pravom ili pravo zloupotreblenija’ [‘Abuse of Right or Right to Abuse’] (2000) 7 Pravo i politika 15 (in Russian).

16. Judin A, ‘Zloupotreblenie processual’nymi pravami v grazhdanskom i ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve: mezhotraslevoj analiz’ [‘Abuse of Procedural Rights in Civil and Criminal Judicial Procedure: Inter-Branch Analysis’] (2006) 5 Lex Russica 976 (in Russian).

17. Kot O, ‘Problema zlovzhyvannia sub’iektyvnym pravom u tsyvilnomu pravi Ukrainy’ [‘Issue of Subjective Right Abuse in Civil Law of Ukraine’] (2013) 4 Visnyk Natsionalnoi akademii pravovykh nauk Ukrainy 133 (in Ukrainian).

18. Luspenyk D, ‘Zlovzhyvannia protsesualnymy pravamy: zakonodavcha rehlamentatsiia, sposoby vyiavlennia ta shliakhy protydii’ [‘Abuse of Procedural Rights: Legislative Regulation, Methods of Identification and Ways of Prevention’] (2015) 6 Chasopys tsyvilnoho i kryminalnoho sudochynstva 150 (in Ukrainian).

19. Nastiuk V, ‘Zlovzhyvannia protsesualnymy pravamy v administratyvnomu sudochynstvi yak proiavy koruptsiinykh ryzykiv’ [‘Abuse of Procedural Rights in Administrative Proceedings as a Manifestation of Corruption Risks’] (2017) 1 Pravo Ukrainy 45 (in Ukrainian).

20. Podshivalov T, ‘Zapret zloupotreblenija processual’nymi pravami v arbitrazhnom processe’ [‘Prohibition of Procedural Rights Abuse in the Arbitration Proceedings’] (2014) 9 Rossijskaja justicija 17 (in Russian).

21. Rubashchenko M, ‘Zlovzhyvannia pravom yak zahalnopravova katehoriia: dopustymist, sutnist, kvalifikatsiia’ [‘Abuse of Right as a Common Law Category: Permissibility, Essence, Qualification’] (2010) 4 Yurydychnyi zhurnal 42 (in Ukrainian).

Thesis abstracts

22. Tkachuk O, ‘Realizatsiia sudovoi vlady u tsyvilnomu sudochynstvi Ukrainy: strukturnofunktsionalnyi aspekt’ [‘Implementation of Judicial Authority in Civil Judicial Procedure of Ukraine: Structural and Functional Aspect’] (avtoref dys d-ra yuryd nauk Kharkivskyi natsionalnyi universytet imeni V N Karazina 2016) (in Ukrainian).