The regulations on model (pilot) cases aimed at accelerating the length of consideration of public law disputes and unification of judicial case law have been applied in the Ukrainian administrative proceedings for more than three years. At the same time, there is currently a lack of evidence to prove the efficiency of these regulations.

The purpose of the article is a preliminary evaluation of the impact of the regulations on model (pilot) cases on the consideration of administrative cases by courts, in particular on the length of proceedings and the forming of consistent judicial case law.

To achieve this goal, the author used modelling and statistical method, but did not limit himself to using only official statistics, but also relied on data generated by the Unified State Register of Judgments.

The study provided an opportunity to obtain evidence in favour of the efficiency of these regulations, as well as to formulate recommendations for development.

Judicial statistics of the Supreme Court reflect the consideration of model cases. During 2018–2020, the Supreme Court issued 24 pilot judgements in the model cases initiated by local courts that found out typical (similar) cases. Only one in 5 such motions of the local courts to consider the case as a model one achieved its goal, the others were rejected by the Supreme Court. The reasons for the low efficiency of court motions need further research.

Judicial statistics of the State Court Administration do not contain data on the consideration of typical cases by lower courts. That doesn’t provide an opportunity tosee the impact of the Supreme Court pilot judgements on judicial practice. Instead, the analysis of the Unified State Register of Judgments data showed that the pilot judgements of the Supreme Court in model cases have an impact on almost every fourth case in the first instance.

It is discovered that the regulations on model cases make it possible to achieve legal certainty in cases based on the same legal problem much faster than before. It is estimated that this institute speeds up proceedings in typical cases by at least 2,5 times compared to the length of proceedings in other administrative cases.

Thus, the advantages of the regulations on model cases are significant acceleration of the consideration of typical cases and ensuring consistent judicial case law, which is proved by the analysis of judicial case law and judicial statistics in administrative cases.

 At the same time, the results of the study allow us to recommend: strengthening the statistical tools of the State Court Administration to monitor the efficiency of the regulations on model cases; further analysis of the reasons for the Supreme Court’s rejection of the majority of first-instance court motions for considering a typical case as the model one; strengthening the preventive role of a pilot judgement of the Supreme Court by empowering the Court to oblige the administrative body or a higher authority to take general measures addressed to a problem identified during the trial. 

Bibliography

Websites

 1. ‘Analitychni tablytsi shchodo stanu zdiisnennia pravosuddia za 2020 rik’ <https://court. gov.ua/inshe/sudova_statystyka/tabli_2020> (accessed: 01.09.2021) (in Ukrainian).

2. ‘Sudova statystyka’ <https://supreme.court.gov.ua/supreme/pokazniki-diyalnosti/sud_ statistika> (accessed: 01.09.2021) (in Ukrainian). ‘Ukrainski suddi provely fakhovi zustrichi z nimetskymy kolehamy’ (02.06.2009) <http://www.judges.org.ua/dig770.htm: (accessed: 01.09.2021).

3. ‘Analiz praktyky zastosuvannia instytutu zrazkovoi spravy v administratyvnomu sudochynstvi yak zakhodu skorochennia tryvalosti sudovoho provadzhennia’ (Rada Yevropy. Traven 2021. Kyiv) <https://rm.coe.int/analysis-of-model-cases-adminproceedingsby-r-kuybida-ukr-fin/1680a28b2f> (accessed: 01.09.2021) (in Ukrainian).