The Doctrine of Excessive Formalism in the Legal Theory and Practice of the European Court of Human Rights

Author:

Shcherbaniuk Oksana,Bohdanevych Tetiana

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.

Publisher

Lifescience Global

Reference22 articles.

1. Affaire Airey c. Irlande. Requête no 6289/73 URL: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre?i=001-61978

2. Affaire Guzzardi c. Italie. Requête no 7367/76 URL: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre?i=001-62056

3. Affaire Xavier Lucas c. France. Requête no 15567/20 URL: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre?i=001-217615

4. Alexander, L., & Schauer, F. (2007). Law’s Limited Domain Confronts Morality’s Universal Empire. William and Mary Law Review, 48(5), 1579-1603. Recuperado de http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr/vol48/iss5/4.

5. CE, Section, 3 juin 2022, n°452798 URL: https://www.conseil-etat.fr/fr/arianeweb/CE/decision/2022-06-03/452798

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3