Випуск: № 1, 2025
Doi: https://doi.org/10.37634/efp.2025.1.6
Автором звернено увагу на факт, що дискреція зі встановлення розміру судових витрат в адміністративному судочинстві пов’язана з реалізацією розсуду, зважаючи на межі судового активізму та диспозитивного тлумачення юридичних норм з метою гарантування юридичної визначеності та єдності судової практики, забезпечення одноманітності способів вирішення спорів. У статті розглянуто критерії вибору оптимальної моделі поведінки зі встановлення розміру судових витрат, ураховуючи конкретні фактичні обставини справи. Приділено увагу релевантній судовій практиці Верховного Суду.
Ключові слова : процесуальний розсуд, правнича допомога, судовий збір, документальне підтвердження, реальність, розумність, співмірність
References:
1. Kuftyriev P.V. Judicial discretion in the theory of law: dis. abstract … PhD in legal sciences: 12.00.01. Kyiv, 2009. 20 p. (in Ukrainian).
2. Miroshnychenko A.M. Judicial discretion, judicial error and judicial arbitrariness (through the prism of judges' liability). Kyiv, 2020. 120 p. (in Ukrainian).
3. Stepanenko V.V. Legal and moral principles of judicial discretion (judicial option). Law Bulletin. 2019. Issue 9. pp. 83–91 (in Ukrainian).
4. Senkiv O.I. Judicial discretion in administrative proceedings: dis. … PhD in legal sciences: 12.00.07. Irpin, 2012. 250 p. (in Ukrainian).
5. Risnyi M.B. Law enforcement discretion in legal practice (general theoretical study). Works of the Lviv Laboratory of Human Rights and Citizen of the Research Institute of State Construction and Local Self-Government of the Academy of Legal Sciences of Ukraine / ed. P.M. Rabinovych;. Lviv, 2007. Series 1. Research and abstracts. Iss. 16. 191 p. (in Ukrainian).
6. Melnyk H.P. Judicial discretion (discretion) as a legal system phenomenon. NaUKMA Research Papers. Law. 2009. Vol. 90. pp. 44–47 (in Ukrainian).
7. Resolution of the Supreme Court dated of 25 April 2023 in the case No. 300/3800/22. URL: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/110441983 (in Ukrainian).
8. Resolution of the Supreme Court dated of 26 December 2023 in the case No. 380/6904/23. URL: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/115945549 (in Ukrainian).
9. Zherebkin V.E. Evaluation concepts of law. Kharkiv, 1976. 16 p. (in Russian).
10. Khvorostiankina A. Definitions in legislative texts: an issue of theory. Pravo Ukrainy. 2005. No. 11. pp. 28–32 (in Ukrainian).
11. Tymoshchuk V. Administrative law in the context of the European choice of Ukraine (from the international conference). Pravo Ukrainy. 2004. No. 3. pp. 25–28 (in Ukrainian).
12. Soler L. Introduction à l’épistémologie. Paris, 2009. 335 p.
13. Nuchelmans G. Late-Scholastic and Humanistic Theories of the Proposition. Amsterdam, 1980. 237 p.
14. Maliarchuk O.V. Means of verbalization category of assessment in contemporary English (on the material of political articles from the journal The New Yorker). New Philology. 2014. No. 62. pp. 192–197 (in Ukrainian).
15. Moiseienko H.V. Valuable concepts in the administrative proceedings of Ukraine: dis. … PhD in legal sciences: 12.00.07. Zaporizhzhia, 2017. 222 p. (in Ukrainian).
16. Oveis C., Horberg E.J., Keltner D. Compassion, pride, and social intuitions of self-other similarity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2010. No. 98. pp. 618–630.
17. Williams M.J. Serving the self from the seat of power goals and threats predict leaders’ self-interested behavior. Journal of Management. 2014. No. 40(5). pp. 1365–1395.
18. Wiltermuth S., Flynn F. Power, moral clarity, and punishment in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal. 2013. No. 53. pp. 1002–1023.
19. Lerner J.S., Goldberg J., Tetlock P.E. Sober second thought: The effects of accountability, anger, and authoritarianism on attributions of responsibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1998. No. 24. pp. 563–574.
20. Schnall S., Roper J., Fessler D.M. Elevation leads to altruistic behavior. Psychological Science. 2010. No. 21(3). pp. 315–320.
21. Brown J.S., Collins A., Duguid P. Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher. 1989. No. 18. pp. 32–42.
22. Macfarlane B. Student performativity in higher education: Converting learning as a private space into a public performance. Higher Education Research & Development. 2015. No. 34(2). pp. 338–350.
23. Barikova A.A. Assessment of the concept in the activities of the Cassation Administrative Court in establishing the admissibility if the case is of considerable public interest or is of exceptional importance to the plaintiff. Bulletin of Zaporizhzhіa National University. 2018. No. 4. pp. 42–48 (in Ukrainian).