court

The article attempts to characterize the principle of inadmissibility of abuse of procedural rights and to analyze the case law on abuse of procedural rights. It is emphasized that the principle of inadmissibility of abuse of procedural rights competes with the principle of access to justice, since in case of leaving a claim without consideration, the right to access to justice is actually restricted. The author interprets the category of “good faith” as an integral characteristic of the behavior of participants to the administrative process.

The article analyses the practice of courts considering cases of bringing persons to administrative liability for committing domestic violence. As social conditions change, so do the forms of violent acts and the preconditions for their commission, as well as the practice of courts considering such cases. Domestic violence is behaviour in which physical and psychological coercion is used to establish and maintain control over a loved one, with whom the perpetrator is usually connected by common life or family ties.

The article is aimed at research of the concept and socio-legal significance of the reconciliation of the parties in the administrative proceedings of Ukraine. On the basis of legal methods of scientific knowledge, such as: dialectical, logical-formal, comparative-legal, etc., modern approaches to understanding the legal nature and essence of the concept of “reconciliation” are considered.

Prosecutors and lawyers, whose work involves ensuring the application of the law and, at the same time, diligently respecting court decisions, the enforcement of which is often their duty, must protect the right to appeal during their execution. It is clear that the reverse is also true: judges must respect prosecutors as representatives of these professional bodies and not interfere with the performance of their duties.

The article discloses the subject composition of the procedure of conciliation of the parties in the administrative proceedings of Ukraine and EU member states. It is noted that the main subjects of the procedure of conciliation of the parties in administrative proceedings are the parties to the dispute themselves, who wished to reconcile, and the legislation should influence these subjects only with the aim of facilitating their achievement of peace.

Corruption is a socio-political phenomenon caused by the imperfection of the functioning of state and public institutions.This negative phenomenon permeates all spheres of society and has a negative impact on the development of economic, social and political life in the country, is a threat to national security and statehood, incompatible with the principles of democratic, legal and social order. The need for an uncompromising fight against corruption in a democratic state governed by the rule of law does not need to be proven.

The article analyzes the place and role of the judge in the procedure of conciliation of the parties in the administrative proceedings of Ukraine and the EU Member States. It is established that in Ukraine there is a simple model of the subjective composition of conciliation of the parties in administrative proceedings, which is characterized by certain elements of a relatively complex model of the relevant subject composition (the judge encourages the parties to try to reconcile, but does not provide them with certain options to be considered).

The article examines simplified claim proceedings as one of the forms of administrative justice, which is designed to consider cases of insignificant complexity (insignificant case) and other cases that need to be resolved quickly. Based on the analysis of the norms of procedural law and judicial practice, the characteristic features of the court's consideration of administrative cases of the least complexity are highlighted.

The article carries out a general theoretical analysis of the activity of the courts, discusses the issues of justice and the activity of the Supreme Council of Justice in the modern period of martial law in Ukraine. 

The article analyzes the features of the social effectiveness of justice, the problems of its provision and ways to improve it. It is noted that the effectiveness of justice belongs to the priority tasks of the state, which is directly related to the provision of human and citizen rights. Social factors that have a negative impact on the effectiveness of justice are highlighted, which should include, in addition to the martial law regime, a decrease in the level of public trust in the court, corruption, as well as a number of political, economic and social realities.