Execution of the main task facing the enforcement bodies on full, timely, impartial execution of court decisions and decisions of bodies (officials) cannot be carried out without clear regulation of the status of subjects of enforcement proceedings and a list of their rights and responsibilities, as this may lead to their abuse of their rights and improper performance of duties, which will deprive individuals of restoring their courtprotected rights.

The purpose of this article is to analyze the theoretical developments of scientists who have studied the subjects of enforcement proceedings, their classification and the Law of Ukraine “On Enforcement Proceedings”, which regulate the status of participants in enforcement proceedings and persons involved in its implementation to assist the executor. in carrying out executive actions. Incorrect definition of the status of the subject in the jurisdictional process has a significant impact on the formulation of its rights and obligations, the implementation of which depends on the timely, complete and impartial execution of court decisions.

Therefore, today the primary task of scientists is to further develop the theory of the executive process, which is the basis for eliminating the shortcomings of this Law, as they lead in practice to litigation. One of the important issues that the authors reveal in the article is the issue of combining the subjects of the enforcement process into certain groups depending on the nature of interest and goal that everyone wants to achieve in enforcement, procedural complicity in enforcement proceedings, which has a significant impact on proper procedure for its implementation and realization of the rights and obligations of debt collectors and debtors, their representatives.

In the conclusions the authors formulate a new classification of subjects of executive process taking into account their status and interest in the proceedings, which provide an opportunity to group them into appropriate groups and taking into account such classification to correctly formulate the provisions of this Law, systematize the rights and obligations of participants who are involved in its commission. The issue of procedural complicity in enforcement proceedings is revealed and the inexpediency of exclusion from Art. 15 of the Law of Ukraine “On Enforcement Proceedings” provisions on the possibilityof participation in enforcement proceedings of several debt collectors or debtors.

This view is based on the complicity of these entities, which follows from the rules of substantive law, in particular their joint and several liability. The status of the prosecutor is revealed, depending on the forms of his participation in the consideration of a civil case by the court, and his transformation into enforcement proceedings. His rights and responsibilities are analyzed, depending on whether he has the status of a representative of the debt collector or the debt collector himself. A number of additions to the norms of the Constitution of Ukraine, the Law of Ukraine “On Enforcement Proceedings” are proposed.

Bibliography

Authored books

1. Bilousov Yu, Vykonavche provadzhennia (Pretsedent 2005) (in Ukrainian).

2. Fursa S, Shcherbak S, Vykonavche provadzhennia v Ukraini (Atika 2002) (in Ukrainian).

 3. Holubieva N (red), Vykonavche provadzhennia: pidruchnyk (Feniks 2020) (in Ukrainian).

 4. Krojtor V, Frolov M, Jasinok N, Ispolnitel’noe proizvodstvo (Jespada 2005) (in Russian).

5. Zavorot’ko P, Processual’nye garantii ispolnenija sudebnogo reshenija (1974) (in Russian).

6. Zavorotko P, Shtefan M, Sudove vykonannia: Dlia vykladachiv i studentiv yuryd. vuziv, pratsivnykiv sudu, prokuratury, yuryskonsultiv pidpryiemstv, ustanov, orhanizatsii (Vyd-vo Kyivskoho un-tu 1967) (in Ukrainian).

Edited books

7. Fursa Ye, ‘Suchasni problemy vykonavchoho protsesu’ v Fursa Ye, Karmaza O, Palyvoda Yu (uporiad), Viddanist pravovii nautsi (Vydavets Palyvoda A V 2011) (in Ukrainian).

8. Fursa S, Fursa Ye, ‘Sub’iekty tsyvilnykh protsesualnykh vidnosyn, yikh klasyfikatsiia’ v Fursa S (red), Tsyvilnyi protses Ukrainy. Akademichnyi kurs (Vydavets Fursa S Ya, KNT 2009) (in Ukrainian).

Journal articles

9. Fursa S, ‘Deiaki uchasnyky vykonavchoho provadzhennia’ (2003) 24 Yurydychnyi visnyk Ukrainy 10 (in Ukrainian).

10. Fursa S, ‘Formuvannia teoretychnykh osnov vykonavchykh protsesualnykh vidnosyn: sutnist, systema, oznaky ta klasyfikatsiia’ (2013) 95 Visnyk Kyivskoho natsionalnoho universytetu imeni Tarasa Shevchenka 12–6 (in Ukrainian).

11. Fursa Ye, Rabovska S, ‘Aresht na pravo vymohy: aktualni pytannia’ (2018) 1 Tsyvilistychna protsesualna dumka 54–8 (in Ukrainian).

12. Uvarova S, ‘Poniattia y vydy uchasnykiv vykonavchoho provadzhennia’ (2018) 10 Pidpryiemnytstvo, hospodarstvo i pravo 155–9 (in Ukrainian).

13. Vintsyslavska M, ‘Sub’iekty vykonavchoho protsesu ta yikh klasyfikatsii: problemni pytannia’ (2012) 3 Visnyk Vyshchoi rady yustytsii 7–16 (in Ukrainian).

Theses

14. Liashenko R, ‘Pryvedennia sudovykh rishen do vykonannia’ (avtoref kand yuryd nauk, 2012) (in Ukrainian).

Conference papers

15. Fursa Ye, Fursa Ye, ‘Problemni aspekty korporatyvnykh interesiv v tsyvilnomu protsesi’ v Rainer Birke (Hrsg), Internationale wissenschaftlich-praktische Konferenz “Das Assoziierungsabkommen und das Wirtschaftsrecht der Ukraine sowie Deutschlands: Implementierung, Realität und Erwartungen” (Deutsch-Ukrainische Juristenve reinigung e.V. 2018) 19–31 (in Ukrainian).