Almanac of law. Issue 17 (2026), pages 583–588.

DOI: 10.33663/2524-017X-2026-17-583-588

Klymkov I. І.
Preparation of Civil Cases for Trial in Ukraine and England: A Comparative Legal Analysis of Doctrinal Approaches

This article is devoted to a comprehensive comparative legal analysis of scholarly approaches to the preparation of civil cases for trial in Ukraine and England. The relevance of the study is обусловлена the growing importance of the preparatory stage in ensuring the effectiveness of civil proceedings, procedural economy, and the realization of the right to a fair trial, particularly in the context of ongoing judicial reforms in Ukraine and its integration into the European legal space.

The study examines doctrinal concepts of preparatory proceedings developed in Ukrainian legal scholarship, where this stage is traditionally considered an independent phase of civil procedure with clearly defined objectives, procedural forms, and legal consequences. Particular attention is paid to such elements as clarification of claims, determination of the composition of participants, formation of the subject of proof, concentration of evidence, and the development of conciliation procedures. At the same time, the article analyzes the English model of pre-trial preparation, which is based on fundamentally different principles. In contrast to the stage-based approach characteristic of Ukrainian law, the English system relies on continuous case management, early communication between the parties, and the use of pre-action protocols. These mechanisms impose obligations on the parties to disclose relevant information, clarify their legal positions, and consider alternative dispute resolution (ADR) before initiating formal court proceedings. The research highlights that an essential feature of the English model is the application of sanctions for improper pre-trial conduct, including cost sanctions, which significantly enhances procedural discipline and encourages responsible behavior of the parties. This creates economic incentives for early dispute resolution and reduces the burden on the judicial system.

The comparative analysis reveals both similarities and fundamental differences between the Ukrainian and English approaches, particularly in terms of the role of the court, the level of party responsibility, the degree of integration of ADR mechanisms, and the effectiveness of evidence concentration. It is established that while Ukrainian doctrine is evolving towards strengthening judicial control and developing conciliation procedures, it still lacks effective mechanisms for ensuring procedural discipline at the pre-trial stage.

The article substantiates the prospects for improving the Ukrainian civil procedure by adapting certain elements of the English model, including the development of pre-trial communication standards, the introduction of effective sanctions for procedural misconduct, and the expansion of early evidence disclosure mechanisms. Such adaptation should not be mechanical but should take into account the specific features of the national legal system and procedural traditions.

Keywords: preparatory proceedings, civil procedure, pre-action protocols, case management, mediation, evidence, alternative dispute resolution.

 References

1. Bondarenko-Zelinska N. L. Pidhotovka tsyvilnykh sprav do sudovoho rozghliadu yak stadiia tsyvilnoho protsesu: dys. … kandydata yurydychnykh nauk: spets. 12.00.03; Kyivskyi Natsionalnyi Universytet im. T. Shevchenka. Kyiv, 2007. 192 s. (in Ukr.).
2. Shapoval M. M. Pidhotovche provadzhennia v tsyvilnomu sudochynstvi Ukrainy: dys. … doktora filosofii (PhD): spets. 081; Sumskyi natsionalnyi ahrarnyi universytet. Sumy, 2022. 200 s. (in Ukr.).
3. Dzhavadov A. Deiaki problemni aspekty pidhotovky tsyvilnykh sprav do sudovoho rozghliadu. Chasopys Kyivskoho universytetu prava. 2021/1. S. 159–163. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36695/2219-5521.1.2021.29 (in Ukr.).
4. Polishchuk Provadzhennia u spravi do sudovoho rozghliadu v tsyvilnomu protsesi Ukrainy: porivniannia iz zarubizhnym dosvidom. Pidpryiemnytstvo, hospodarstvo i parvo. 5/2016. S. 14–18 (in Ukr.).
5. Kyrychenko V., Lytvyniuk Ya. M., Atamanchuk I. V. Teoretyko-pravovi aspekty instytutu vrehuliuvannia sporu za uchastiu suddi u tsyvilnomu protsesi. Visnyk studentskoho naukovoho tovarystva DonNU imeni Vasylia Stusa. 2020/12 t. 2. S. 176–181 (in Ukr.).
6. Prushchak V. Ie. Vrehuliuvannia sporu za uchastiu suddi u tsyvilnom usudochynstvi Ukrainy: dys. doktora filosofii: spets. 081; Natsionalnyi universytet «Odeska yurydychna akademiia»; Ministerstvo osvity i nauky Ukrainy. Odesa, 2020. 192 s. (in Ukr.).
7. Andrews, Neil. The modern civil process: judicial and alternative forms of dispute resolution in England. Mohr Siebeck, 2008. 327 p.
8. Browne, Kevin; Catlow, Civil litigation. The University of Law, 2020. 480 p.
9. Allen, Mediation law and civil practice. BloomsburyProfessional, 2019. 415 p.

Дата першого надходження рукопису до видання: 25.03.2026
Дата прийнятого до друку рукопису після рецензування: 09.04.2026
Дата публікації: 30.04.2026