Features of calculation of reasonable time of the trial in civil cases in the context of the practice of the European court of human rights

Т. Цувіна


Problem setting. European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) guarantees right to a fair trial within a reasonable time for everyone (par. 1 art. 6 ECHR). Reasonable time of the trial is an element of the right to a fair trial. One of the main directions for development of civil procedure in Ukraine is the implementation of international standards of fair trial, in particular standards of reasonable time of the trial. Recent research and publications analyses. Foreign and Ukrainian scientists such as Komarov V. V., Neshataeva T. M., Sakara N. U. and others in their works paid attention to different aspects of problems connected with the right to a fair trial within a reasonable time, but a comprehensive study devoted to a features of calculation of reasonable time of the trial taking into account the practice of the ECHR on this issue wasn’t conducted. Paper objective. Main objective of the article is to study decisions of the ECHR concerning the interpretation of Par. 1, Art. 6 ECHR and analyze features of calculation of reasonable time of the trial to make recommendations on implementation of such national level. Paper main body. As a rule, according to a practice of ECHR reasonable time of civil proceedings begins on the date on which the case is referred to a judicial authority. Thus ECHR can take as the starting point the date of a preliminary application to an administrative authority, especially when this is a prerequisite for commencement of proceedings. The end of reasonable time of the trial connected with the moment when the court decision become final or its execution. Conclusions of the research. Calculation of reasonable time of the trial in civil cases in circumstances when an application to the court was preceded by a seeking for protection from the authorities and public servants of executive power has features. In such situations a calculation of reasonable time of the trial doesn’t begin from the moment of seeking for protection from any authority or public servant of executive power, provided by art. 17 of Civil Code of Ukraine. The calculation begins from this moment only if such authority provides guarantee of a “court” according to the practice of ECHR or this is a prerequisite for commencement of proceedings.


reasonable time of trial; the beginning of reasonable time of trial; the end of reasonable time of trial; judgment of European Court of Human Rights; terms in civil proceedings

GOST Style Citations

1. Muti v. Italy, 23 March 1994, § 12, Series A no. 281-C [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу :

2. Cesarini v. Italy, 12 October 1992, § 16, Series A no. 245-B [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу : aspx?i=001-57773.

3. Golder v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1975, § 32, Series A no. 18 [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу : pages/ search.aspx?i=001-57496.

4. Цувіна Т. А. Право на суд у цивільному судочинстві : монографія / Т. А. Цувіна. – Харків: Слово, 2015. – 281 с.

5. Schouten and Meldrum v. the Netherlands, 09 December 1994, §§ 61-62, Series A no. 304 [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу : sites/eng/pages/search. aspx?i=001-57907.

6. Біленський О. О. Європейські стандарти ефективного відновлення порушених цивіль- них прав та інтересів в механізмі їх захисту органами і посадовими особами виконавчої влади / О. О. Біленський // Актуальні питання публічного та приватного права. – 2014. – № 3. – С. 47–54.

7. Комаров В. В. Право на справедливий судовий розгляд в цивільному судочинстві : навч. посібник / В. В. Комаров, Н. Ю. Сакара. – Харків : НЮАУ, 2007. – 42 с.

8. Chevrol v. France, no. 49639/99, §§ 62-85, ECHR 2003-III [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу : aspx?i=001-60941.

9. Van De Hurk v. Netherlands, 19 April 1994, § 45, Series A no. 288 [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу : pages/search.aspx?i=001-57878.

10. Benthem v. Netherlands, 23 October 1985, § 40, Series A no. 97 [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу : pages/search.aspx?i=001-57436.

11. Oleksandr Volkov v. Ukraine, no. 21722/11, § 109-117, ECHR 2013 [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу : pages/search.aspx?i=001-115871.

12. Vocaturo v. Italy, 24 May 1991, § 14, Series A no. 206-C [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу : search.aspx?i=001-57717.

13. Vallée v. France, 26 April 1994, §33, Series A no. 289-A [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу : aspx?i=001-57884.

14. Estima Jorge c. Portugal, 21 April 1998, § 37, Recueil des arrêts et décisions 1998-II [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу : aspx?i=001-58155.

15. Romashov v. Ukraine, no. 67534/01, 27 July 2004 [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу : 16. Zasurtsev v. Russia, no. 67051/01, § 62, 27 April 2006 [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу :

Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM

Copyright (c) 2015 Тетяна Цувіна

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

ISSN 2224-9281