The role of the supreme courts: in the search of the balance between private and public interests in civil procedure
The article is devoted to the analysis of the problem issues of the role of the supreme courts in common law and civil law legal traditions through the prism of models of proceedings in such courts in order to determine the general trends in this field. The author analyzes three main models of the proceedings in courts of the highest instance: a second appeal, a cassation and a revision. A second appeal model refers to the common law countries, and cassation and revision models refer to civil law countries. Analysis of the civil procedural legislation and resent reforms of civil procedure in European countries give grounds to conclude that there is a strong tendency to convergence between cassation and revision models nowadays. The author analyzes two main approaches to the identification of the role of supreme courts in modern societies: conception of private interests and conception of public interests. The cassation model of appeal reflects the priority of the private legal interests in the activity of the supreme courts, instead the second appeal model is the predominance of the public legal foundations. More promising direction from the point of view of achieving the tasks of civil justice is the election at the national level of a model in which preference is given to public-law interest during proceedings in the highest court which is reflected in revision model. The recent proposed changes to the civil procedural legislation of Ukraine testifies to the strong tendency of approximation of the national cassation proceedings model to the revision model. Such situation is justified and reflects the current trends in the development of civil procedural legislation in European countries.
Full Text:PDF (Українська)
Galic, A.A. (2019). Civil Law Perspectives on the Supreme Court and its Functions. Studia Juridica. 81. 44–86.
Bobek, M. (2007). Quantity of Quality? Re-Assessing the Role of Supreme Jurisdictions in Central Europe. EUI Working Paper LAW. 36.
Jolowicz, J.A. (1997). The Role of the Supreme Court at the National and International Level. The Role of the Supreme Courts at the National and International Level. Athens: Sakkoulas, 22–67.
Husarov, K.V. (2010). Perehliad sudovykh rishen v apeliatsiinomu ta kasatsiinomu poriadkakh [Appeal and Cassation Review of Court Decisions]. Kharkiv: Pravo [in Ukrainian].
Jolowicz, J.A., Van Rhee, C.H. (1999). Recourse against Judgments in the European Union. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.
Kodek, G.E. (2014). Appellate Proceedings In Civil Cases – Traditional Remedies In Light Of Contemporary Problems. Nobody’s Perfect Comparative Essays on Appeals and other Means of Recourse against Judicial Decisions in Civil Matters. Cambridge: Intersentia, 35–52.
Bravo-Hurtado, P. (2014). Two Ways To Uniformity: Recourse To The Supreme Court In The Civil Law And The Common Law World. Nobody’s Perfect Comparative Essays on Appeals and other Means of Recourse against Judicial Decisions in Civil Matters. Cambridge: Intersentia, 319–338.
MacCormick, N., Summers, R.S. (1997). Interpreting Precedents: a Comparative Study. Dartmouth Publishing: Aldershot.
Charruault, Ch. (2019). Le pourvoi en cassation en matière civile. Studia Juridica, 81, 87–102.
Galic, A. (2014). Reshaping The Role Of Supreme Courts In The Countries Of The Former Yugoslavia. Nobody’s Perfect Comparative Essays on Appeals and other Means of Recourse against Judicial Decisions in Civil Matters. Cambridge: Intersentia, 291–318.
Komárek, J. (2011). Judicial Lawmaking and Precedent in Supreme Courts. LSE Legal Studies Working Paper. 4. 38. URL: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1793219.
Fallon, R.H. (2003). The Federal Courts and the Federal System. New York: Foundation Press, 5th ed.
Mazeaud, H., Mazeaud, L. (1978). Traité théorique et pratique de la responsabilité civile, III, 6th ed. Paris.
Jolowicz, J.A. (2000). On civil procedure. Cambridge Univercity Press.
Lindblom, P.H. (2000). Progressiv Process – Spridda uppsatser om domstollsprocessen och samhällsutvecklingen. Uppsala: Iustus Förlag.
Proverka sudebnyih postanovleniy v grazhdanskom protsesse stran ES i SNG. (2007). [Review of court decisions in the civil process of the EU and CIS countries]. Moscow: Norma [in Russian].
Calamandrei, P. (1976). Opere Giuridiche (a cura di Mauro Cappelletti). Vol. VII. Napoli: Morano.
Domej, T. (2014). What Is An Important Case? Admissibility Of Appeals To The Supreme Courts In The German-Speaking Jurisdictions. Nobody’s Perfect Comparative Essays on Appeals and other Means of Recourse against Judicial Decisions in Civil Matters. Cambridge: Intersentia, 277–290.
Mamchenko, N. (2019). Pro shcho kazhe statystyka: Kasatsiinyi tsyvilnyi sud VS pidbyv pidsumky za 2018 rik po vsii yurysdyktsii. Sudebno-iurydycheskaia hazeta, 2–5 (471–474). URL: https://sud.ua/ru/news/publication/134669-pro-scho-kazhe-statistika-kasatsiyniy-tsivilniy-sud-vs-pidbiv-pidsumki-za-2018-rik-po-vsiy-yurisdiktsiyi [in Ukrainian].
Zubac v. Croatia, no. 40160/12, § 85, 5 April 2018. URL: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-181821.
GOST Style Citations
Metrics powered by PLOS ALM
Copyright (c) 2020 Тетяна Андріївна Цувіна
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.