EUROPEAN STANDARDS OF ACCESS TO JUSTICE AND THE PRACTICE OF THE ECHR IN REGULATING CIVIL PROCEDURAL PARTICIPATION: A COMPARATIVE LEGAL DIMENSION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18623/rvd.v23.6767Palavras-chave:
Access to Justice, Fair Trial, European Court of Human Rights, Civil Procedural Joinder, Equality of Arms, Comparative Legal Analysis, Civil ProcedureResumo
The article provides a comprehensive study of European standards of access to justice and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights in regulating civil procedural joinder from a comparative legal perspective. It is substantiated that the right of access to justice in contemporary European law constitutes an integral element of the broader right to a fair trial and encompasses not only the formal possibility of bringing a claim before a court, but also the effectiveness, practicality, and enforceability of judicial protection. It is established that the case law of the ECtHR plays a decisive role in shaping the content of this right by developing criteria for the admissibility of procedural limitations, as well as standards of equality of arms, legal certainty, proportionality, and effectiveness of judicial proceedings. The study demonstrates that civil procedural joinder cannot be regarded as a neutral technical mechanism, as it directly affects the realization of the right to a fair trial by balancing procedural economy with the protection of individual rights of the parties involved. It is argued that the admissibility of joinder should be assessed in light of key principles, including equality of arms, reasonable time of proceedings, individualization of procedural status of co-participants, and avoidance of excessive formalism. Within the framework of comparative legal analysis, the article examines the regulation of joinder in various European legal systems, identifying common trends and national specificities. It is concluded that the harmonization of national civil procedural legislation with ECtHR standards should not be reduced to formal unification but must be based on the functional alignment of procedural mechanisms with the requirements of fair trial. Particular attention is paid to the need to refine the criteria for admissibility of joinder, strengthen the active role of the court in managing multi-party proceedings, and ensure effective guarantees of individual procedural protection.
Referências
Atamanchuk, I. V. (2019). Vprovadzhennia yevropeiskykh standartiv u sferu protsesualno-pravovoho rehuliuvannia tsyvilnoho sudochynstva Ukrainy. Shliakhy vdoskonalennia zakonodavstva, (1), 109–116.
European Court of Human Rights. (1975). Golder v. the United Kingdom (Application no. 4451/70), Judgment of February 21, 1975. Retrieved March 12, 2026, from https://hudoc.echr.coe.int
European Court of Human Rights. (1979). Airey v. Ireland (Application no. 6289/73), Judgment of October 9, 1979. Retrieved March 12, 2026, from https://hudoc.echr.coe.int
European Court of Human Rights. (1989). H. v. France (Application no. 10073/82), Judgment of October 24, 1989. Retrieved March 12, 2026, from https://hudoc.echr.coe.int
European Court of Human Rights. (1993). Dombo Beheer B.V. v. the Netherlands (Application no. 14448/88), Judgment of October 27, 1993. Retrieved March 12, 2026, from https://hudoc.echr.coe.int
European Court of Human Rights. (1995). Bellet v. France (Application no. 23805/94), Judgment of December 4, 1995. Retrieved March 12, 2026, from https://hudoc.echr.coe.int
European Court of Human Rights. (1997). Hornsby v. Greece (Application no. 18357/91), Judgment of March 19, 1997. Retrieved March 12, 2026, from https://hudoc.echr.coe.int
European Court of Human Rights. (1999). Brumărescu v. Romania (Application no. 28342/95), Judgment of October 28, 1999. Retrieved March 12, 2026, from https://hudoc.echr.coe.int
European Court of Human Rights. (2000). Krčmář and Others v. the Czech Republic (Application no. 35376/97), Judgment of March 3, 2000. Retrieved March 12, 2026, from https://hudoc.echr.coe.int
Hura, O. V. (2019). Dostup do pravosuddia u praktytsi Yevropeiskoho sudu z prav liudyny. Yurydychnyi naukovyi elektronnyi zhurnal, (3), 163–166.
Keller, H., & Stone Sweet, A. (2008). A Europe of Rights: The Impact of the ECHR on National Legal Systems. Oxford University Press.
Ryzhenko, N. O., & Bohush, N. H. (2025). Vykonannia rishen YeSPL u tsyvilnykh spravakh yak forma implementatsii mizhnarodnykh standartiv pravosuddia. Molodyi vchenyi, 6(137), 115–119.
Tkalia, O. V. (2025). Pravo na spravedlyvyi sud yak yevropeiskyi standart prav liudyny. Pryvatne ta publichne pravo, (2), 67–71.
Tsuvina, T. (2020). Pravo na dostup do sudu: Pidkhid YeSPL. Pidpryiemnytstvo, hospodarstvo i pravo, (4), 60–64.
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Submeto (emos) o presente trabalho, texto original e inédito, de minha (nossa) autoria, à avaliação de Veredas do Direito - Revista de Direito, e concordo (amos) que os direitos autorais a ele referentes se tornem propriedade exclusiva da Revista Veredas, sendo vedada qualquer reprodução total ou parcial, em qualquer outra parte ou outro meio de divulgação impresso ou eletrônico, dissociado de Veredas do Direito, sem que a necessária e prévia autorização seja solicitada por escrito e obtida junto ao Editor-gerente. Declaro (amos) ainda que não existe conflito de interesse entre o tema abordado, o (s) autor (es) e empresas, instituições ou indivíduos.
Reconheço (Reconhecemos) ainda que Veredas está licenciada sob uma LICENÇA CREATIVE COMMONS:
Licença Creative Commons Attribution 3.0
