THE PRINCIPLE OF REASONABLENESS IN THE SYSTEM OF PRINCIPLES OF CIVIL PROCEDURAL LAW OF UKRAINE: THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO THE DEFINITION OF THE CONCEPT

Abstract

The article is devoted to revealing the legal nature of the principle of reasonableness and its place in the system of principles of civil procedure, starting from the study of approaches to the system of principles of civil procedure, their classification and differentiation. It is stated that currently the principle of reasonableness of civil proceedings is not singled out by scholars proceduralists as the fundamental or leading one, although it occupies a prominent place in the system of principles and belongs to the constitutional ones, because it manifests itself primarily within reasonable time by the court (Par. 7, Part 2, Article 129 of the Basic Law of Ukraine). Besides, it can be called a conventional principle of procedural activity. It is proved that the substantive legal concept significantly affects the disclosure of the dynamics of the implementation of the principle of reasonableness in civil proceedings. The substantive concept of the principle of reasonableness in civil proceedings is in organic connection with revealing the procedural characteristics of this principle in its fullest extent. In particular, during the examination of the balance of public and private interests in the consideration of a civil case by a court, and the exclusion of reasonable doubts of the judge when choosing the rule of law to be applied in the case or to be interpreted. Civil proceedings, despite being a properly regulated procedural activity, include a number of contractual provisions: in particular, the right of the parties to a civil dispute to conclude an amicable agreement; the right to settle a civil dispute with the participation of a judge, to transfer the dispute to arbitration, etc. In such relations, the principle of reasonableness is manifested in combination with the contractual principles of civil proceedings, and therefore can significantly affect the transformation of procedural relations between the parties to civil proceedings. It is established that now the legislator uses the concept of "reasonableness", among other things, in the course of: 1) setting procedural deadlines; 2) reservation on the application of judicial discretion in the determination of judicial proceedings; 3) determining the amount of compensation for the actual loss of time, and 4) in the case of legislative consolidation of the judge's doubts when choosing the rule of law to be applied during the trial. It is proved that the principle of reasonableness correlates with the principle of legality as a principle of civil proceedings. In this context, reasonableness and legality are interrelated concepts, the relationship between which is the use of the legislator's requirement of reasonableness as a way to establish the limits of discretion of participants in civil proceedings, and, above all, the court. Despite the interaction of these principles, each of them remains an independent in meaning and role principle of civil proceedings. Guided by the principle of the rule of law and applying the principle of legality, the judge chooses and applies a specific rule of law, that is determines how certain social relations should be regulated by analyzing the statutory rule of conduct (rule of law). In civil proceedings, this is characterized by the widest application of the analogy of law (as well as the subsidiary application of the rules of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine that is known as procedural analogy). In most cases, a single rule of law cannot fully convey the true meaning that the legislator wanted to convey to legal practitioners; many provisions of normative acts form a single idea precisely in relation. And only the principle of reasonableness, applied by the judge in a particular case, can serve as a means of understanding the idea of the legislator in its entirety and reflect the correct practical operation of law.