LEGAL CONCLUSION OF THE SUPREME COURT IN ENSURING THE RULE OF LAW AND THE RIGHT TO COURT

Abstract

Introduction. In the contemporary Ukrainian legal system, the legal conclusions of the Supreme Court occupy a special place within the mechanism for ensuring the rule of law, legal certainty, and the unity of judicial practice. The statutory requirement to take into account conclusions concerning the application of legal norms (in particular, pursuant to Article 13 of the Law of Ukraine “On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges” and Part 4 of Article 263 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine) transforms judicial practice into a source of enhanced predictability in law application. At the same time, it raises important questions regarding the limits of judicial discretion, the criteria for determining the “similarity of legal relationships,” and the procedures for departing from established approaches. Purpose. To comprehensively examine the legal conclusion of the Supreme Court as an instrument for ensuring the principle of the rule of law and the right to a court (including access to justice, a fair hearing, and proper reasoning), to identify the challenges associated with its application, and to propose directions for improving the mechanisms of taking such conclusions into account and departing from them. Materials and Methods. The study is based on: 1. The Constitution of Ukraine, the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine, and the Law of Ukraine “On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges”; 2. Case law of the Supreme Court, including positions of the Grand Chamber and cassation chambers; 3. Scholarly works of domestic and foreign researchers in the field of procedural law. The methodological foundation consists of general scientific methods (analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction) and special legal methods (formal-dogmatic, comparative legal, systemic-functional, and interpretative methods). Results. The study establishes that the legal conclusion of the Supreme Court constitutes a key instrument for ensuring the principle of the rule of law within the national legal system, as it contributes to the formation of legal certainty, predictability of law application, and the unity of judicial practice. It is substantiated that it is precisely through the mechanism of taking legal conclusions into account that uniform application of legal norms in similar legal relationships is ensured, which is a necessary condition for the implementation of the principle of equality before the law and the court. It has been demonstrated that the legal conclusion of the Supreme Court performs not only the function of unifying judicial practice but also has a direct impact on the realization of the right to a court. The consistency and stability of legal positions reduce the risk of arbitrary law application, ensure predictability of judicial decisions for participants in proceedings, and enhance the level of trust in the judiciary. It has been established that the absence of coherence in judicial practice or the improper consideration of legal conclusions may lead to violations of fair trial standards and undermine legal certainty as an essential component of the rule of law. At the same time, the study reveals the existence of systemic problems in the application of legal conclusions, in particular: – the absence of a legislatively clear definition of the legal nature of a legal conclusion and its place within the system of sources of law, which leads to divergent interpretations of its binding force by courts of different instances; – inconsistent approaches to interpreting the duty to “take into account” legal conclusions, which in practice is sometimes reduced to formal citation without analyzing the similarity of legal relationships or, conversely, to unconditional mechanical application without consideration of the specific circumstances of the case; – the lack of unified criteria for determining the similarity of legal relationships, resulting in heterogeneous judicial decisions in cases with comparable factual and legal characteristics; – insufficient regulatory framework governing the procedure for a reasoned departure from a legal conclusion, creating the risk of both unjustified changes in judicial practice and excessive “conservation” thereof, which may hinder the development of law. As a result of the research, it is substantiated that the effectiveness of a legal conclusion as a mechanism for ensuring the rule of law depends on its clarity, structured presentation, publicity, and accessibility, as well as on the existence of a transparent procedure for its application and the possibility of its reasoned reconsideration. Improvements to legislative regulation are proposed through the clarification of the status of legal conclusions, the unification of standards for reasoning their application and departure, and the institutional strengthening of mechanisms for monitoring the unity of judicial practice. Discussion. Further academic research should be directed toward a comprehensive rethinking of the legal conclusion of the Supreme Court as an element of the doctrine aimed at ensuring the unity of judicial practice within a continental legal system. Of particular importance is the study of the relationship between the legal conclusion and the principle of judicial independence, including the determination of an optimal balance between the binding force of established approaches and the freedom of judicial discretion. A relevant area of research involves the development of a unified methodological test for determining the similarity of legal relationships, as well as a standardized model for a reasoned departure from legal conclusions, which would ensure the stability of law application without restricting the dynamic development of law. Separate scholarly attention should be devoted to the implementation of modern digital tools for the analysis of judicial practice in order to detect inconsistencies in the application of legal conclusions, as well as to the creation of centralized registers of актуальних legal positions with a clear indication of their status. A promising direction also lies in comparative legal research into mechanisms for ensuring the unity of judicial practice in both continental and common law systems, with a view to developing an optimal model for the evolution of the institution of the legal conclusion in Ukraine. From a strategic perspective, the further development of the institution of the Supreme Court’s legal conclusion should aim at strengthening public trust in the judiciary, improving the quality of judicial decisions, and ensuring the genuine, rather than merely declarative, implementation of the principle of the rule of law and the right to a court within the national legal system.