It is substantiated that the essence of conciliation procedures is a joint,
voluntary search by the parties for a mutually acceptable or mutually beneficial
way out of the conflict situation. It is noted that conciliation procedures can take
place both with the participation of only the parties to the conflict, and a third party that provides appropriate assistance to the conflicting parties in resolving the situation that has arisen. An essential feature of conciliation procedures is that, based on the results of their conduct, the jurisdictional body does not make a
decision on the merits of the case, but instead, if an agreement is reached between them, the parties enter into an appropriate agreement in which they voluntarily agree to resolve the dispute under certain conditions.
In general, in most of the leading countries of the world, the institution of
dispute settlement with the participation of a judge, or judicial mediation (a similar
procedure in terms of content), is a fairly popular procedural tool for consideration
of economic cases. In this regard, it is substantiated that the vector of development
of national procedural legislation, expressed in the implementation of such an
institute, fully corresponds to international trends. However, in the procedural
aspect of the settlement of the dispute with the participation of a judge in the
Economic Court of Ukraine, it diverges from the world models of the organization
of a similar form of consideration of economic cases.
In general, in most of the leading countries of the world, the institution of
dispute settlement with the participation of a judge, or judicial mediation (a similar
procedure in terms of content), is a fairly popular procedural tool for consideration
of economic cases. In this regard, it is substantiated that the vector of development
of national procedural legislation, expressed in the implementation of such an
institute, fully corresponds to international trends. However, in the procedural
aspect of the settlement of the dispute with the participation of a judge in the
Economic Court of Ukraine, it diverges from the world models of the organization
of a similar form of consideration of economic cases.
The foreign experience of dispute settlement with the participation of a
judge in economic litigation is highlighted using the example of such countries as the United States of America, China, Pakistan, France, Germany, Poland,
Kazakhstan, Georgia and Uzbekistan.
It is substantiated that due to the imperfection of the economic and
procedural provision of the dispute settlement procedure with the participation of a judge, its effectiveness is insignificant. In this regard, it is proposed to implement a set of measures in the law-making sphere.
Separate ways of improving the mechanism of termination of the dispute
settlement procedure with the participation of a judge in economic litigation are
proposed, which are aimed at: determining the procedure for submitting a
statement by a party to terminate the dispute settlement procedure; establishing a
list of actions and/or inactions that can be qualified by the judge as aimed at
delaying the dispute settlement procedure.
