欧洲人权法院法律理论与实践中的过度形式主义理论

Oksana Shcherbaniuk, Tetiana Bohdanevych
{"title":"欧洲人权法院法律理论与实践中的过度形式主义理论","authors":"Oksana Shcherbaniuk, Tetiana Bohdanevych","doi":"10.6000/2817-2302.2024.03.03","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As a means of organising certain existing disputes and resolving conflicts within society, it has made the institution of procedural formalities necessary since the beginning of history. The existence of formalities in a proceeding, whether judicial or extrajudicial, serves to limit certain situations in the course of the process. It is well known that there are several principles that regulate the formalities of procedure, mainly by establishing procedural limits. These reason values are thus aimed at achieving the principles of purpose. The methodological basis of the article is the dialectical method of cognition based on materialistic dialectic with the use of such general scientific methods as analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, abstraction, specification, analogy, hypothesis building method, and the system-structural method. The study has resulted in the identification of cases of excessive formalism by courts when applying the rules of procedural law. The practical significance of the results obtained is to prevent such mistakes by law enforcement authorities in the future. As a result of writing this article, the author has established that the main manifestations of excessive formalism are the creation by the court of procedural obstacles to the implementation of procedural rules by the parties to the case, strict interpretation by national legislation of the procedural rules, and return of an administrative claim on formal grounds. It is proved that excessive formalism in resolving the issue of acceptance of a statement of claim leads to a violation of the right to fair judicial protection.","PeriodicalId":509601,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Doctrine of Excessive Formalism in the Legal Theory and Practice of the European Court of Human Rights\",\"authors\":\"Oksana Shcherbaniuk, Tetiana Bohdanevych\",\"doi\":\"10.6000/2817-2302.2024.03.03\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"As a means of organising certain existing disputes and resolving conflicts within society, it has made the institution of procedural formalities necessary since the beginning of history. The existence of formalities in a proceeding, whether judicial or extrajudicial, serves to limit certain situations in the course of the process. It is well known that there are several principles that regulate the formalities of procedure, mainly by establishing procedural limits. These reason values are thus aimed at achieving the principles of purpose. The methodological basis of the article is the dialectical method of cognition based on materialistic dialectic with the use of such general scientific methods as analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, abstraction, specification, analogy, hypothesis building method, and the system-structural method. The study has resulted in the identification of cases of excessive formalism by courts when applying the rules of procedural law. The practical significance of the results obtained is to prevent such mistakes by law enforcement authorities in the future. As a result of writing this article, the author has established that the main manifestations of excessive formalism are the creation by the court of procedural obstacles to the implementation of procedural rules by the parties to the case, strict interpretation by national legislation of the procedural rules, and return of an administrative claim on formal grounds. It is proved that excessive formalism in resolving the issue of acceptance of a statement of claim leads to a violation of the right to fair judicial protection.\",\"PeriodicalId\":509601,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.6000/2817-2302.2024.03.03\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6000/2817-2302.2024.03.03","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

作为组织某些现存争端和解决社会内部矛盾的一种手段,自有史以来,程序手续的制度就变得十分必要。无论是司法程序还是非司法程序,程序手续的存在都是为了限制程序过程中的某些情况。众所周知,有几项原则对程序的手续进行了规范,主要是规定了程序限制。因此,这些理性价值旨在实现目的原则。文章的方法论基础是以唯物辩证法为基础的辩证认识方法,并运用了分析、综合、归纳、演绎、抽象、具体化、类比、假设建立法、系统结构法等一般科学方法。通过研究,发现了法院在适用程序法规则时过度形式主义的案例。研究结果的实际意义在于防止执法机关今后再犯此类错误。通过撰写本文,作者确定了过度形式主义的主要表现形式是法院为案件当事人执行程序规则设置程序障碍、国家立法对程序规则的严格解释以及以形式理由退回行政诉求。事实证明,在解决是否接受申诉书的问题上过度的形式主义会导致公平司法保护权受到侵犯。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Doctrine of Excessive Formalism in the Legal Theory and Practice of the European Court of Human Rights
As a means of organising certain existing disputes and resolving conflicts within society, it has made the institution of procedural formalities necessary since the beginning of history. The existence of formalities in a proceeding, whether judicial or extrajudicial, serves to limit certain situations in the course of the process. It is well known that there are several principles that regulate the formalities of procedure, mainly by establishing procedural limits. These reason values are thus aimed at achieving the principles of purpose. The methodological basis of the article is the dialectical method of cognition based on materialistic dialectic with the use of such general scientific methods as analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, abstraction, specification, analogy, hypothesis building method, and the system-structural method. The study has resulted in the identification of cases of excessive formalism by courts when applying the rules of procedural law. The practical significance of the results obtained is to prevent such mistakes by law enforcement authorities in the future. As a result of writing this article, the author has established that the main manifestations of excessive formalism are the creation by the court of procedural obstacles to the implementation of procedural rules by the parties to the case, strict interpretation by national legislation of the procedural rules, and return of an administrative claim on formal grounds. It is proved that excessive formalism in resolving the issue of acceptance of a statement of claim leads to a violation of the right to fair judicial protection.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Algorithmic Decision Making: Can Artificial Intelligence and the Metaverse Provide Technological Solutions to Modernise the United Kingdom’s Legal Services and Criminal Justice? The Doctrine of Excessive Formalism in the Legal Theory and Practice of the European Court of Human Rights Local Self-Governance and State Power in the Russian Federation: In the Search for a Way Out of the Institutional Trap Judges and Social Networks The Implementation of Sustainable Development to Achieve Climate Justice: Indonesian Perspective as an Archipelagic State
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1