Measures of procedural enforcement in civil and economic legistation: legal nature

Keywords: measures of procedural enforcement, civil legislation, economic legislation, procedural enforcement, juridical liability, synergetic approach, synergetics, self-organization


The article deals with the notion and grounds of using measures of procedural enforcement in the civil and economic legislation,
to the legal nature of these measures synergetic perspective. It is noted, that the definition of the procedural enforcement is better given
in the civil procedural law because exactly this branch is historically the first, “mother” of the economic and administrative procedural
law; that’s why evident theoretical works related to the different institutions of the civil procedural law can be used in the neighboring
branches as well taking into consideration the peculiarities of each process. The application of the procedural enforcement provides the
interference into the sphere of the procedural rights of the participants of the process and in the sphere of their personal rights with the
purpose to renew and adhere to the rules prescribed by the procedural law and for a quick case solution by court and in no case intends
to punish those who break procedural norms, so the limits, provided with the procedural enforcement don’t have the signs of liability.
From the perspective of synergistic, enforcement is used by the system due to its inherent ability to self-organize in case of some
chaos during the case due to non-compliance with regulations, failure of duties, abuse of rights, creating obstacles to justice, ie due to
increase in the level of entropy in the judicial system. In order to effectively deal with entropy in the judicial system, procedural coercion
must be close to the nature of the system itself, consistent with the relevant legal norms and institutions.
To achieve this goal, procedural enforcement provides for different degrees of legal restrictions (measures), corresponding to the
level of tension that arises in the system during the proceedings in violation of established proceedings.


1 Komziuk A.T. (2000). Derzhavno-vladnyi aspect administratyvnoho prymusu. Visnyk Akademii pravovykh nauk Ukrainy. Karkiv. №4 [in Ukrainian].
2 Kytsik K.V. (2016). Shchodo vyznachennia poniattia protsesualnogo prymusu v tsivilnomu sudochinstvi. Naukovyi visnyk Uzhhorodskoho natsionalnoho universitetu. Seria Pravo. Uzhhorod. №41. Tom 1 [in Ukrainian].
3 Smokov S.M. (2012). Vydy obmezhen konstytutsiynych prav hromadian u novomu Kryminalnomu protsesyalnomu kodeksi Ukrainy. Forum prava. №2 [in Ukrainian].
4 Butnev V.V. (1999). Grazhdanskaia prothessualnaia otvetstvennost. Yaroslavl [in Rossia].
5 Kutsik K.V. (2017). Zachody protsesualnogo prymusu v tsivilnomu sudochinstvi: dis. … kand. yurid. nauk: 12.00.03/ Natsionalna academia vnutrishnich sprav. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
6 Rieznikova V.V. (2018). Zachody protsesualnogo prymusu. Suchasni vyklyky ta aktualni problemy sudovoi reformy v Ukraini: materialy II Mizhnar. nauk.-prakt. konf. (Chernivtsi, 18-19 zhovtnia 2018 r.). Chernivtsi [in Ukrainian].
7 Teoria derzhavy i prava: pidruch. dlia stud. yuryd. vyshch. navch. zakl.(2014)/ za red. O.V. Petrishina. Kharkiv: pravo [in Ukrainian].
How to Cite
КorunchakL. (2020). Measures of procedural enforcement in civil and economic legistation: legal nature. Law Review of Kyiv University of Law, 1(3), 162-165. Retrieved from
The issues of civil law, commercial law, labour law and social security law of U