Pros and Cons of European Civil Procedure

European civil procedure is a conditional term that represents a supranational sphere of cooperation and harmonization of civil procedural law rules of the European Union Member States. Harmonization of civil procedural rules has not only positive, but also a number of negative aspects. Thus, European civil procedure is deprived of any internal structure and cannot be called a complex institution. European Union law rules mainly concern cooperation between States, they are deprived of such basic concepts as purposes, goals and principles of a branch of law, and do not regulate the procedure of proving and litigation. European civil procedure has developed through adoption of independent acts concerning relevant issues, which made it possible to resolve immediate problems, but when such acts become numerous, lack of systematization inhibits further development. Both the adoption of the Code and the adoption of more specific acts could help solve the problem. The scope of application of European civil procedure rules is limited to transboundary cases. A situation may arise when there is no any analogue of the relevant "unified" procedure at the national level. Thus, the advantages of the European civil procedure cannot be used to resolve a domestic case. It is impossible to use them with regard to third countries, moreover, the European project of procedural unification is opposed to the worldwide efforts on unification and harmonization of procedural law. Parties to the cooperation differ depending upon the sphere of cooperation, but the list of these States is exhaustive, none of the Sates intending to join the European Union can obtain such a status. However, given that the European civil procedure is not codified, this situation still undermines the unity of "a genuine European space of justice." There is no unified legal basis for the adoption of procedural rules: The competence of the European Union is limited by the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, which makes it possible to adopt only such legal acts that have a clearly established legal "basis" in constituent agreements. Another notable problem is optionality of some requirements of European civil procedure. The current European procedural regulations are not only autonomous, but also optional, which means that the applicant is granted the right to choose whether European or national procedures will be applied to deal with the case.

European civil procedure, Regulations, Directives, European Union, transboundary cases, harmonization of law, unification of law, supranational law, European procedures, national law, national courts

1. Бирюков М. М. Европейское право: до и после Лиссабонского договора. - М., 2016.

2. Брановицкий К. Л.; Котельников А. Г.; Решетникова И. В. Гражданское судопроизводство за рубежом. - М. : Инфотропик, 2013.

3. Гурбанов Р. А. Взаимодействие судебных органов на европейском пространстве: вопросы теории и практики : автореф. дис.. д-ра юрид. наук. - М., 2016.

4. Любченко М. Я. К вопросу о принципах взаимодействия Европейского Суда по правам человека и национальных юрисдикций (в контексте гармонизации гражданского процесса) // Проблемы гражданского судопроизводства в трудах и деятельности М. С. Шакарян : материалы междунар. науч.-практ. конф. - М. : Университет имени О.Е. Кутафина (МГЮА), 2014.

5. Кудрявцева Е. В. Гармонизация и унификация гражданского процессуального права в европейских странах // Реформа гражданского процесса в суде первой инстанции в государствах Балтийского моря и Центральной Европы, 16-19 сентября 2004 г. - Вильнюс, 2005.

6. Рее К. Х. ван. Гармонизация гражданского процесса в глобальном масштабе // Европейский гражданский процесс и исполнительное производство : сб. материалов Междунар. науч.-практ. конф. 25 марта 2011 г. - Казань : Казанский (Приволжский) федеральный университет, 2011.

7. Семушкина Н. И. К вопросу о кодификации норм европейского международного частного права // Законность и правопорядок в современном обществе. - 2015. - № 25.

8. Bolt J. Review Essay - Procedural Laws in Europe. Towards Harmonisation (Marcel Storme ed. 2003) // German Law Journal. - 2005. - Vol. 6 (4).

9. Cuniberti G. The First Stage of the Abolition of the Exequatur in the European Union // Columbia Journal of European Law. - 2007/2008 - Vol. 14.

10. Dyrda t. Jurisdiction in Civil and Commercial Matters under the Regulation no. 1215/2012: between Common Grounds on Jurisdiction and Divergent National Rules // The Interaction of National Legal Systems: Convergence or Divergence? - Vilnius, 2013.

11. Elmer M. Brief Considerations on the Harmonisation of Civil Procedure in Europe and Worldwide // Uniform Law Abstract. - 2003. - Vol. 8.

12. Fasching H. Kommentar zu den Zivilprozeßgesetzen. - Wien : MANZ, 2010.

13. Fiorini A. The Evolution of European Private International Law // International and Comparative Law Quarterly. - 2008. - Vol. 57 (4).

14. Gilles P. Skirtingų nacionalinių teisės normų vienodinimas ir derinimas remiantis civilinio proceso teisės europeizacijos pavyzdžiu. Civilinio proceso pirmosios instancijos teisme reforma Baltijos Jūros regiono valstybėse ir Centrinėje Europoje. 2004m. rugsėjo 16-19d. - Vilnius : Vilniaus universiteto leidykla. 2005.

15. Gumuliauskiene L. Užsienio teismų sprendimų pripažinimas ir vykdymas civiliniame procese (Daktaro disertacija). - Vilnius : Mykolo Romerio Universitetas, 2008.

16. Grinten P. van der. Challenges for the Creation of a European Law of Civil Procedure // Civil Justice Abstract. - 2007. - Vol. 3.

17. Hartnell H. EUstitia: Institutionalizing Justice in the European Union // Northwestern Journal of International Law and Business. - 2002-2003. - Vol. 23.

18. Hess B. The Integrating Effect of European of European Civil Procedure Law // European Journal of Law Reform. - 2002. - Vol. 4.

19. Ізарова І. О. Теоретичні засади цивільного процесу Європейського Союзу. - Київ : Дакор, 2015.

20. Juenger F. Some Comments on European Procedural Harmonization // American Journal of Comparative Law. - 1997. - Vol. 45 (4).

21. Komarov V. The Civil Procedure in the Global Context // Law of Ukraine. - 2011. - No. 9-10.

22. Kramer X. E. Cross-Border Enforcement in the EU: Mutual Trust Versus Fair Trial? Towards Principles of European Civil Procedure // International Journal of Procedural Law. - 2011. - Vol. 2. - P. 202-230.

23. Kramer X. Towards ELI-UNIDROIT Model Rules of Civil Procedure: Basic Premises and Challenges. Bay Area Civil Procedure Forum. - Hastings (San Francisco). - 19 April 2016.

24. Kramer X. Enhancing Enforcement in the European Union. The European Order for Payment Procedure and Its Implementation in the Member States, Particularly in Germany, the Netherlands, and England // Enforcement and Enforceability. Tradition and Reform / eds. C. H. van Rhee, A. Ucelac. - Antwerpen : Intersentia, 2010. - 331 p.

25. Kruger T. The South African Litigant and European Union Rules of Civil Procedure // Comparative and International Law Journal of South Africa. - 2005. - Vol. 38.

26. Kyriakides N. The United Kingdom's stance to recently introduced European Account Preservation Order // Civil Justice Quarterly. - 2014. - Vol. 33 (4).

27. Lasserre M.-C. Le droit de la procedure civile de l'Union Europeenne forme t-il un ordre procedural. These pour le doctorat en Droit. - Nice : Universite de Nice Sophia-Antipolis, 2013.

28. Legrand P. Against a European Civil Code // Modern Law Abstract. - 1997. - Vol. 1.

29. Lenaerts K. The Contribution of the European Court of Justice to the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice // International and Comparative Law Quarterly. - 2010. - Vol. 59.

30. Manko R. Europeanisation of Civil Procedure: towards Common Minimum Standards? // European Parliamentary Research Service. - 2015. - P. 1-29.

31. Norkus R. Nauji teisiniai instrumentai civilinio proceso srityje: ar bus sukurtas Europos Sąjungos civilinis procesas? // Teisė ir teisminę gynybą ir jos realizavimo praktiniai aspektai. - Vilnius, 2006.

32. Šinova R., Valentova L. Handbook of European Civil Procedure Law. - Olomouc, 2012. - 175 p.

33. Smits J. European Private Law: a Plea for a Spontaneous Legal Order // European Integration and Law / eds. : D. Curtin, J. Smits [et al.]. - Antwerpen : Intersentia, 2006.

34. Staudinger A., Leible S. Article 65 of the EC Treaty in the EC System of Competencies // The European Legal Forum. - 2000. - Vol. 4 (1).

35. Storme M. Improving Access to Justice in Europe // Teka Komisji Prawniczej. - 2010. - Vol. 3.

36. Storskrubb E. Civil Justice - a Newcomer and an Unstoppable Wave // The Evolution of EU Law / eds. G. de Bürca, P. Craig. - Oxford : OUP, 2011. - Р. 309-330.

37. Storskrubb E. Civil Procedure and EU Law: a Policy Area Uncovered. - Oxford : OUP, 2008. - 184 p.

38. Tulibacka M. Common minimum standards of civil procedure: European Added Value Assessment (by M. Tulibacka, M. Sanz, R. Blomeyer) // European Parliamentary Research Service. - 2016.

39. Tulibacka M. Europeanization of Civil Procedures: In Search of a Coherent Approach // Common Market Law Abstract. - 2009. - Vol. 46 (5).

40. VernadakiZ. EU Civil Procedure and Access to Justice after the Lisbon Treaty: Perspectives for a Coherent Approach (PhD Thesis). - L. : University College London, 2013. - 296 p.

41. Vernadaki Z. Gvil Procedure Harmonization in the EU: Unravelling the Policy Considerations // Journal of Contemporary European Research. - 2013. - Vol. 9 (2).

42. Wagner G. Harmonization of Civil Procedure: Policy Perspectives // Civil Litigation in a Globalizing World / eds. X. E. Kramer, C. H. van Rhee. - The Hague : Asser Press, 2012.

43. Wagner R. Do We Need a Rome 0 Regulation? // Netherlands International Law Abstract. - 2014. - Vol. 61 (2).

44. Wiedemann D. Convergence and Divergence in the EU's Judicial Cooperation in Civil Matters: Pleading for a Consolidation through a Uniform European Conflict's Codification. Catolica Graduate Legal Research Conference. - 2014. - Conference Proceedings.