Goals of Civil Litigation: Finding of a Common Understanding to Ensure Litigation Efficiency
https://doi.org/10.31085/2541-8823-2020-5-2-105-125
Abstract
Legal reforms that are regularly carried out in many countries of the world have put on the agenda the problems of efficiency of all types of legal activities. An important place among them is occupied by issues of efficiency of civil litigation. It is known that efficiency characterizes the implementation of the goals of civil proceedings. However, there is no single answer to the question of what the goals of the civil process are today. Researchers have expressed a variety of positions on this issue. The article presents an analysis of existing views on the goals of civil proceedings, including based on methods of Law and economics; an attempt is made to synthesize a common understanding of the goals of civil litigation, which allows to give an objective assessment of its effectiveness. The main goal of civil litigation is considered the effective protection of the rights and legitimate interests of participants in legal relations, correlated with the actual results achieved and the costs of court proceedings.
About the Author
S. A. Kurochkin
Ural Federal University named after the first President of Russia B. Yeltsin;
Ural State Law University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Sergey Kurochkin (Yekaterinburg, Russia) – Candidate of Legal Sciences, Vice-rector for International Relations;
Associate professor of the Department of Theory of State and Law
Mira St., 19, Yekaterinburg, 620000
References
1. Abolonin V. On the development of civil procedure through a change in the basic paradigm, 12, Arbitration and civil procedure, 43, (2012).
2. Alan Uzelac, General report. Civil Procedure in Cross-cultural Dialogue: Eurasia Context: IAPL World Conference on Civil Procedure, September 18–21, 2012, Moscow, Russia. Conference Book / Ed. by Dmitry Maleshin. 111, 114 (Statut, 2012).
3. Bonner A. T., Justice as a type of state activity, Selected Works 175 (Moscow, 2017).
4. Christian Koller, Austrian National Report (including additional information on Germany). Civil Procedure in Cross-cultural Dialogue: Eurasia Context: IAPL World Conference on Civil Procedure, September 18–21, 2012, Moscow, Russia. Conference Book / Ed. by Dmitry Maleshin. 136, 137 (Statut, 2012).
5. Douglass C. North, Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance 35 (Cambridge University Press, 1990).
6. Elisabetta Silvestri, Italian National Report. Civil Procedure in Cross-cultural Dialogue: Eurasia Context: IAPL World Conference on Civil Procedure, September 18-21, 2012, Moscow, Russia. Conference Book / Ed. by Dmitry Maleshin. 187, 189 (Statut, 2012).
7. Fu Yulin, Chinese National Report. Civil Procedure in Cross-cultural Dialogue: Eurasia Context: IAPL World Conference on Civil Procedure, September 18–21, 2012, Moscow, Russia. Conference Book / Ed. by Dmitry Maleshin. 164, 165 (Statut, 2012).
8. Genn H. What is justice for? Reform, ADR, and Access to Justice // Yale Journal of Law and Humanities. Winter, 2012.
9. Geoffrey P. Miller, The Legal-Economic Analysis of Comparative Civil Procedure, 45 Am. J. Comp. L. 905, 906 (1997).
10. Karapetov A. Economic Analysis of Law (Moscow, 2010).
11. Kerimov D, Methodology of law: subject, functions, problems of philosophy of law, (Moscow, 2003).
12. Lars Skyttner, General Systems Theory: Problems, Perspectives, Practice 53 (World Scientific Publishing Co. Ltd, 2nd ed. 2005).
13. Lazarev V.V., Fursov D. A., Justice in the life of society 3, Bulletin of civil procedure, 16 (2019).
14. Lazarev V.V., Law enforcement acts and their effectiveness in a developed socialist society (theoretical research).
15. Maleshin D. Ya., Civil procedural system of Russia. A Doctoral Thesis in Law.
16. Mirzoev R. G., Kharchenko A. F. Basic procedures for systems research (Saint Petersburg 2000).
17. Mogilevsky V., Methodology of Systems (Moscow 1999).
18. Nicholas L. Georgakopoulos, Principles and methods of law and economics: basic tools for normative reasoning (Cambridge University Press, 2005).
19. Petrukhin I., Baturov G., Morshchakova T. Theoretical foundations of the effectiveness of justice (Moscow 1979). Problems of Judicial Law (Moscow, 1983).
20. Remco van Ree, Dutch National Report (with some additional information on Belgium and France). Civil Procedure in Cross-cultural Dialogue: Eurasia Context: IAPL World Conference on Civil Procedure, September 18–21, 2012, Moscow, Russia. Conference Book / Ed. by Dmitry Maleshin. 196, 196–197 (Statut, 2012).
21. Richard Marcus, American National Report. Civil Procedure in Cross-cultural Dialogue: Eurasia Context: IAPL World Conference on Civil Procedure, September 18–21, 2012, Moscow, Russia. Conference Book / Ed. by Dmitry Maleshin. 227, 227 (Statut, 2012).
22. Richard Posner, The Problems of Jurisprudence (Harvard University Press, 1993).
23. Teresa Arruda Alvim Wambier, Brazilian National Report. Civil Procedure in Cross-cultural Dialogue: Eurasia Context: IAPL World Conference on Civil Procedure, September 18–21, 2012, Moscow, Russia. Conference Book / Ed. by Dmitry Maleshin. 157, 157 (Statut, 2012).
24. The Supreme Court Annual Report and Accounts 2018–2019, 16 (Crown Copyright, 2019).
25. Tsikhotskiy A, Regulatory significance of the goals of justice in civil cases, Legal problems of strengthening Russian statehood, 241 (Tomsk, 2001).
26. Yarkov V, Project of procedural reform: quo vadis? 12, Arbitration and Civil Procedure, 10, (2017).
27. Zhilin G. Justice in civil cases: topical issues (Moscow, 2010).
Review
For citations:
Kurochkin S.A. Goals of Civil Litigation: Finding of a Common Understanding to Ensure Litigation Efficiency. Kazan University Law Review. 2020;5(2):105-125. https://doi.org/10.31085/2541-8823-2020-5-2-105-125
Views:
15
Email this article 