Improvement of the national administrative judicial procedure inevitably necessitates that the requirements of procedural regulation be more extensively implemented in it. The need to regulate court proceedings by clear, short and understandable prescriptions of procedural rules and taxonomic requirements to the judicial process ensues from the need for an efficient means that regulates court proceedings, since according to current national law of administrative procedure resolution of disputes is the priority task of administrative judicial procedure. The purpose of this article is to clarify the essence and meaning of the procedural regulation principle and to formulate its definition with the aim of making a proposal for further legislative entrenchment among the foundations (principles) of administrative judicial procedure, thus providing the presiding judge with controls of the judicial process and helping to streamline and improve court proceedings. The author makes an analysis of the principle of procedural regulation of administrative process which has no implementation mechanism entrenched in terms of procedure. It is established that its implementation in administrative judicial procedure will have a positive impact on and guarantee the compliance with the rights and legitimate interests of individuals and legal entities in the course of administration of justice, and will also contribute to the well-targeted regulation of the procedure, as well as the efficiency and optimality of court trials. Regulation of the procedure of a court session involves the outlining of the right of a judge to establish a clear framework for explanations, motions and responses provided by participants of the process with the aim of achieving the maximum efficiency and preventing any delays in the proceedings. Based on a comprehensive analysis of procedural rules and theoretical foundations the author defines the notion “principle of procedural regulation” which refers to external requirements to the conduct of a court session; besides, time limits for the proceedings are set which should be determined by the presiding judge within the framework of procedural authorities and which are clear, understandable and binding upon the parties to court proceedings. The use of the procedural regulation principle is inextricably linked to the organization of conducting the judicial proceedings as a part of the consolidated large-scale mechanism designated to ensure the viability of the efficient and accessible judicial system, as well as the active role of a judge in this process for the sake of real efficiency in practical everyday activities.

List of legal documents

Legislation

1. Kodeks administratyvnoho sudochynstva Ukrainy [The Code of Administrative Judicial Procedure of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy [Law of Ukraine] vid 6 lypnia 2005 r. № 2747-IV. URL: http://zakon3.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2747-15/ed20170803 (accessed: 05.02.2018) (in Ukrainian).

2. Kodeks administratyvnoho sudochynstva Ukrainy [The Code of Administrative Judicial Procedure of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy [Law of Ukraine] vid 6 lypnia 2005 r. № 2747-IV (v redaktsii Zakonu Ukrainy [As Amended by the Law of Ukraine] vid 3 zhovtnia 2017 r. № 2147-VIII). URL: http://zakon0.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2747-15 (accessed: 06.02.2018) (in Ukrainian).

3. Konstytutsiia Ukrainy [Constitution of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy [Law of Ukraine] vid 28 chervnia 1996 r. № 254k/96-VR. URL: http://zakon0.rada.gov.ua/laws/ show/254%D0%BA/96-%D0%B2%D1%80 (accessed: 02.02.2018) (in Ukrainian).

4. Konventsiia pro zakhyst prav liudyny i osnovopolozhnykh svobod [Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms] vid 4 lystopada 1950 r.: ratyfikovana Zakonom Ukrainy [Ratified by the Law of Ukraine] vid 17 lypnia 1997 r. № 475/97-VR. URL: http://zakon3.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_004 (accessed: 05.02.2018) (in Ukrainian).

5. Pro ratyfikatsiiu Konventsii pro zakhyst prav liudyny i osnovopolozhnykh svobod 1950 roku, Pershoho protokolu ta protokoliv № 2, 4, 7 ta 11 do Konventsii [On the Ratification of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, 1950, the First Protocol and Protocols № 2, 4, 7 and 11 to the Convention]: Zakon Ukrainy [Law of Ukraine] vid 17 lypnia 1997 r. № 475/97-VR. URL: http://zakon2.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/475/97-вр (accessed: 05.02.2018) (in Ukrainian).

6. Pro vnesennia zmin do Hospodarskoho protsesualnoho kodeksu Ukrainy, Tsyvilnoho

protsesualnoho kodeksu Ukrainy, Kodeksu administratyvnoho sudochynstva Ukrainy ta inshykh zakonodavchykh aktiv [On Amendments to the Economic Procedure Code of Ukraine, the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine, the Code of Administrative Judicial Procedure of Ukraine and other Acts of Legislation]: Zakon Ukrainy [Law of Ukraine] vid 3 zhovtnia 2017 r. № 2147-VIII. URL: http://zakon5.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2147-19 (accessed: 05.02.2018) (in Ukrainian).

Cases

7. Ankerl v Switzerland App no 17748/91 (ECtHR, 23 October 1996) (in English). 8. Dombo Beheer B V v The Netherlands App no 14448/88 (ECtHR, 27 October 1993) (in English).

Bibliography Dictionaries

9. Dubichynskyi V (red), Suchasnyi tlumachnyi slovnyk ukrainskoi movy: 60 000 sliv [Modern Thesaurus of the Ukrainian Language: 60,000 words] (VD “Shkola” 2007) (in Ukrainian).

Journal articles

10. Buchyk A, ‘Analiz pryntsypu protsesualnoi ekonomii u skladovii administratyvnoho protsesu’ [‘Analysis of the Procedural Economy Principle as Part of the Administrative Process’] (2016) 2 Chasopys Natsionalnoho universytetu “Ostrozka akademiia” Pravo <http://lj.oa.edu.ua/articles/2016/n2/16baysap.pdf> accessed 5 February 2018 (in Ukrainian). Websites

11. ‘Kerivni pryntsypy sudovoho taim-menedzhmentu (2-ha redaktsiia)’ [‘Guidelines for Judicial Time Management (2nd edition)’] (Vyshcha kvalifikatsiina komisiia suddiv Ukrainy) <https://vkksu.gov.ua/userfiles/doc/cepej/SATURN%20Guidelines%2%D1% 83%D0%BA%D1%80-4.pdf> accessed 9 February 2018 (in Ukrainian).

12. ‘Rekomendatsiia № R (84) 5 Komitetu Ministriv Rady Yevropy derzhavam-chlenam shchodo pryntsypiv tsyvilnoho sudochynstva, spriamovanykh na vdoskonalennia funktsionuvannia pravosuddia’ [‘Recommendation No R (84) 5 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to Member States on the Principles of Civil Procedure Designed to Improve the Functioning of Justice’] (Verkhovnyi Sud Ukrainy) <http://www.scourt.gov.ua/clients/vsu/vsu.nsf/(documents)/7442A47EB0B374B9C225 7D8700495F8B> accessed 6 February 2018 (in Ukrainian).

13. ‘Rishennia Rady suddiv Ukrainy vid 9 chervnia 2016 r. № 46 “Shchodo vyznachennia koefitsiientiv navantazhennia na suddiv”’ [‘Decision of the Council of Judges of Ukraine dated June 9, 2016 No 46 “On Determining the Judge Load Coefficients”’] (Rada suddiv Ukrainy, 22 Cherven 2016) <http://www.rsu.gov.ua/ua/events/risenna-rsu-no46-vid-09062016-sodo-viznacenna-koeficientiv-navantazenna-na-suddiv> accessed 9 February 2018 (in Ukrainian).