The most relevant issues in the law enforcement practice of the Supreme Court are examined. The place and role of procedural principles (fundamental basis of the judiciary) in the formation of legal conclusions of the courts of cassation of Ukraine are clarified. Capability introducing the principle of procedural economy in the judiciary through the use of alternative dispute resolution and the system of pre-trial settlement of disputes as the primary and priority judicial facilities is proved. The real implementation of the idea of the “electronic court” will also contribute Unified Judiciary Information Telecommunication System (UJITS) the introduction of this principle.

 It was concluded that the performance of outlined steps as able to ensure the achievement of the key goal of improving the national judicial system: to make state judicial protection fair, predictable, fast, effective and accessible by reducing the workload of courts and nonjudicial dispute and conflict resolution.

The opinion is substantiated that the principle of procedural economy in the theory of law embodies an idea that should be implemented in the judicial system of the state through the development of a complete dispute resolution procedure. Harmonised introduction of the principle of procedural economy into civil, economic and administrative (industry) procedural norms needs the will of the legislator and different from proposed by the courts approach are required. Reconciliation of such legal category as “principle of procedural economy” with the other principles of judicial proceedings will contribute to the elimination of uncharacteristic simplifications of the process and further improvement of mechanisms of judicial protection.

When application of named non-legitimised principle in modern judicial practice is used in court sessions, it is most likely interpreted as a mix of different principles, combined and implemented in various combinations that depend on the specific circumstances of the case, the methods used by the parties to achieve their goal in the process of proof. At the same time, the mention of such principle in court decisions is, in our opinion, unacceptable and redundant, and only indicates an attempt to strengthen certain arguments of judicial discretion and, as a result, the court decision with statements about the need to ensure procedural economy.

Bibliography

Authored books

1. Komarov V, Tsyvilne protsesualne zakonodavstvo u dynamitsi rozvytku ta praktytsi Verkhovnoho Sudu Ukrainy (Pravo 2012) (in Ukrainian).

Edited books

2. Grazhdanskij process: uchebnik (Komarov V red, 2001) (in Russian).

3. Teoriia derzhavy i prava. Akademichnyi kurs: pidruchnyk (Zaichuk O, Onishchenko N red, Yurinkom Inter 2006) (in Ukrainian).

4. Tsyvilnyi protses: navchalnyi posibnyk (Bilousov Iu red, Pretsedent 2005) (in Ukrainian).

Encyclopedias

5. ‘Pryntsypy prava’ v Yurydychna entsyklopediia, t 5: P–S (Shemshuchenko Iu vidp red), Ukrainska entsyklopediia im M P Bazhana 2003) (in Ukrainian).

Journal articles

6. Hulatkan S, Tkachuk A, ‘Pryntsyp protsesualnoi ekonomii v tsyvilnomu protsesi’ (2021) 4 Yurydychnyi naukovyi elektronnyi zhurnal 205–8. https://doi.org/10.32782/25240374/2021-4/48 (in Ukrainian).

7. Iliopol I, ‘Kontsept pryntsypiv tsyvilnoho protsesualnoho prava, shcho zastosovuiutsia u stadii perehliadu sudovykh rishen v apeliatsiinomu poriadku, sformovanykh pid vplyvom Yevropeiskoi konventsii z prav liudyny i osnovopolozhnykh svobod’ (2020) 39 Chasopys tsyvilistyky 60. https://doi.org/10.32837/chc.v0i39.382 (in Ukrainian).

8. Tkachuk O, ‘Suchasni problemy zdiisnennia pravosuddia v tsyvilnomu sudochynstvi Ukrainy’ (2016) 4 Jurnalul juridic national: teorie şi practică 106–11 (in Ukrainian).

Newspaper articles

9. ‘Suddiv zaklykaly do protsesualnoi ekonomii – sekretar Plenumu VS’ (Zakon i Biz nes, 23.05.2022) <https://zib.com.ua/ua/151496.html> (accessed: 06.03.2023) (in Ukrainian).

10. Luspenyk D, ‘Kasatsiini filtry u tsyvilnykh spravakh: problemni pytannia sudovoho pravotlumachennia ta pravozastosuvannia’ (Sudiebno-yurididcheskayf gazeta, 15.06.2020) <https://sud.ua/ru/news/blog/171319-kasatsiyni-filtri-u-tsivilnikh-spravakhprob lemni-pitannya-sudovogo-pravotlumachennya-ta-pravozastosuvannya> (accessed: 06.03.2023) (in Ukrainian).

11. Ponzel M, ‘Praktyka VS: pryntsyp protsesualnoi ekonomii chy shliakh do pravovoho nihilizmu?’ (Protocol.ua, 06.09.2019) <https://protocol.ua/ua/praktika_vs_printsip_ protsesualnoi_ekonomii_chi_shlyah_do_pravovogo_nigilizmu> (accessed: 06.03.2023) (in Ukrainian).

12. Zhukov S, Zastosuvannia pryntsypu protsesualnoi ekonomii ta inshi pravovi vysnovky VS u spravakh pro bankrutstvo za sichen 2019 roku (Bankrutstvo ta likvidatsiia, 27.02.2019) <https://bankruptcy-ua.com/articles/11118> (accessed: 06.03.2023) (in Ukrainian).

Theses

13. Tkachuk O, ‘Realizatsiia sudovoi vlady u tsyvilnomu sudochynstvi Ukrainy: strukturnofunktsionalnyi aspekt’ (avtoref dys d-ra yuryd nauk, 2016) (in Ukrainian)