Вимоги до позовної заяви у цивільному процесі: порівняльно-правовий аналіз законодавства зарубіжних країн

The article is devoted to an in-depth comparative analysis of the requirements imposed on a statement of claim in civil proceedings in France, Italy, Turkey, and Azerbaijan. The author has examined the legally established elements that must be included in a statement of claim, the prescribed procedure for its submission, as well as the legal consequences of non-compliance with the established procedural forms. Particular attention has been paid by the author to how each national legal system defines the structure and content of a statement of claim, determines the limits of formalization, and establishes the relationship between formal and substantive requirements. The author has established that, despite the shared belonging of all four legal systems to the Romano-Germanic (continental) tradition, the regulation of this procedural category exhibits significant differences. It has been demonstrated by the author that these differences are determined both by the historical evolution of national civil procedure systems and by varying approaches to ensuring a balance between procedural efficiency, formal certainty, and the protection of parties’ rights. In particular, the author has examined the considerable variability in the level of detail required for mandatory requisites of a statement of claim, in the procedure for its registration, in the requirements for specifying evidence and legal grounds, as well as in the measures of liability for violating established requirements. The author has demonstrated that these differences have a direct impact on the procedural efficiency of judicial proceedings, the protection of parties’ rights, and the timeliness of case consideration. Thus, the author has established that the analysis allows for the identification of both common features of the formalization of a statement of claim in states belonging to the continental legal family and the individual characteristics of each national system that shape the national specificity of civil procedure. It has been demonstrated by the author that the conclusions obtained contribute to a deeper understanding of procedural regulation mechanisms and can be utilized both for further academic research and for the development of recommendations aimed at improving civil procedure in order to enhance its efficiency, legal certainty, and the protection of participants’ rights.