TRANSFORMATION OF THE LEGISLATIVE REGULATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF DISPOSITIVITY IN CIVIL PROCEEDING

Abstract

The global transformations that have been taking place in Ukraine since the end of the last century have caused the need to take appropriate measures in the field of the judicial system and proceeding, including the civil one. The first steps on the way to revising the civil procedural legislation of Ukraine and bringing it into line with the fundamental acts in the field of human rights protection were taken in 1996. In particular, the Law of Ukraine “On Amendments and Additions to the Civil Procedural Code of Ukraine” dated 02.02.1996 No. 27/96 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine of 1963 (hereinafter – the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine) was supplemented by a number of provisions, which changed the general system of civil justice institutions. Significant changes affected, for the most part, the regulation of adversarial civil proceedings, the provision of the appropriate position of the court in the field of civil procedural evidence. Adjustment of Art. 15 of the Civil Code of Ukraine of 1963 and other provisions [1] became the impetus for a broad scientific discussion, which is logical and justified, because we have moved from a mostly investigative process to a competitive one, at least in the legislative plane. However, at the background of the discussion about the expediency and timeliness of competitive innovations, attention was lost to other fundamental principles of civil justice, they were not “on the agenda” to the extent they deserve. Among them is the dispositive nature of civil proceedings. The significant turn in the development of civil procedural legislation, which was marked by the adoption of a new edition of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine in 2004, and later in 2017, also did not become a basis for analysis and systematic discussion of the specifics of the regulation of the principle of dispositivity, dispositive rights. Meanwhile, changes have taken place, and they are significant not only from the point of view of enshrining the relevant categories directly in the civil procedural law, but also essential, such as affect the substantive components of dispositivity, its understanding and perception. Therefore, the relevance of the scientific analysis of the regulation of the principle of dispositivity by civil procedural legislation, the identification of the prerequisites for the changes that have taken place, and the forecasting of theoretical and practical prospects seems to be well-founded.