Harmonisation of Ukrainian legislation with EU law in the field of alternative civil dispute resolution: Challenges and prospects

The research relevance is determined by the urgent need to harmonise Ukrainian legislation in the process of European integration, as well as by the shortcomings of the Ukrainian judicial system – heavy court workload, lengthy and complex litigation, significant legal costs, and the phenomenon of continuation of the conflict in a latent form after a court decision is made due to the different perception of a fair resolution of the dispute between parties. The study aimed to outline the theoretical foundations of alternative dispute resolution and studying the experience of EU member states in terms of mechanisms and practices of their implementation. The study demonstrated that maintenance of partnership relations between the parties to a dispute is one of the most important factors contributing to the active development of alternative dispute resolution, since while courts use a narrow definition of the problem (only such circumstances that have legal significance), alternative dispute resolution uses a broad approach. As a rule, not only legal factors are covered (although sometimes they are excluded from consideration altogether), but also commercial interests, personal factors, public and even social factors, which substantially improves the balance of the interests among parties. The review of the implementation of alternative dispute resolution in different EU countries, as well as the analysis of the general EU approach in this area, concluded that there are no specific mandatory provisions in European law on the use of such practices in civil disputes, and Member States have a great deal of freedom to develop and implement appropriate paradigms and models. In the context of Ukrainian cultural aspects, including strong traditions of institutionalisation, it is recommended that judges be involved in the process of alternative dispute resolution in various roles. This would make the transition period smoother and ensure for the eventual development of perfect, “polished” and efficient national legislative mechanisms for alternative dispute resolution corresponding to European law and traditions