RECONCILIATION IN CIVIL JURISDICTION

The article deals with the problem of differentiation of the concepts of “settlement agreement”, “conciliation procedure”, “reconciliation” in relation to civil law conflicts. It is shown that the settlement agreement is, along with a court decision, an act of procedural law that has public law features. An out-of-court conciliation agreement, which is a civil law transaction, that is, an act of private law, has a fundamentally opposite legal nature. This is what determines the low demand for extrajudicial conciliation procedures (for example, mediation, negotiations) — their results do not have the properties of universal binding, enforceability, prejudice. It is also necessary to distinguish between the conciliation procedure and the settlement agreement: in some cases (not always) the settlement agreement may be the result of the conciliation procedure. At the same time, even a conciliation procedure that has not ended with the conclusion of an agreement has an independent legal meaning (for example, mandatory claim settlement of a dispute). The nature of the judicial conciliation procedure, which is not defined by the current legislation, is investigated. The author of the article considers it as part of a single procedural form of protection.