Balance of Court Protection Effectiveness and Access to Justice in the Context of Achieving Civil Litigation Goals
https://doi.org/10.17803/2713-0533.2025.3.33.545-569
Abstract
The paper analyzes the notions “court protection effectiveness” and “access to justice” in civil cases, as well as the balance between them. The study established that court protection accessibility is the key for effective justice; however, the accessibility does not guarantee effectiveness. Moreover, there were revealed objective and subjective circumstances influencing achieving civil litigation goals in the context of justice effectiveness. Subjective factors encumbering receipt of the court protection of violated rights are circumstances depending on the plaintiff. In some instances, a goal of judicial recourse cannot be achieved because of plaintiff’s bona fide ignorance. Objective preclusions do not depend on the plaintiff though sometimes are created by courts. The authors studied indicators, conditions, assessment criteria, guarantees of court protection effectiveness, alongside with characteristics of the latter. There was made a conclusion that the most significant characteristics of court protection are the following: timely case consideration; rationality of procedural activities by the court and interested persons; procedural economy; validity, relevancy, equitableness of a trial court decision; its stability and consistency with higher courts position within the principle of legal certainty; court decision enforceability. There have been worked out ways to improve legislation that are aimed at optimizing implementation of the right to judicial recourse and receiving effective court protection. Some of the most significant ways are stimulation of mediation through offering relief for the payment of state duty, implementing criteria for admissibility of complaints, as well as criteria for admissibility of limitation of the right to judicial recourse.
About the Authors
V. F. BorisovaRussian Federation
Victoria F. Borisova, Cand. Sci. (Law), Associate Professor, Department of Civil Procedur
Saratov
WoS Researcher ID: AAI-5822-2021
E. G. Vyushkina
Russian Federation
Elena G. Vyushkina, Cand. Sci. (Pedagogy), Associate Professor, Foreign Languages Department
Saratov
WoS Researcher ID: AAE-1389-2021
Scopus Author ID: 56022610900
References
1. Ani keev, I. and Shumov, P., (2019). Efficiency of Judicial Process. Bul letin of Science and Practice, 5(6), pp. 425–431, doi: 10.33619/2414-2948/43/57. (In Russ.).
2. Ast afiev A.Yu., (2012). Effectiveness of Judicial Work: Definition and the Evaluation Criteria. Proceedings of Voronezh State University. Series: Law, 1, pp. 123–133. (In Russ.).
3. Bernem, U., Reshetnikova, I.V., and Yarkov, V.V., (1996). Sudebnaya reforma: problemy grazhdanskoy yurisdiktsii [Court reform: civil jurisdiction problems]. Yekaterinburg. (In Russ.).
4. Bonelli, M., Eliantonio, V., and Gentile, G. (eds), (2023). Article 47 of the EU Charter and Effective Judicial Protection, Volume 2: The National Courts’ Perspectives. Oxford, Hart Publishing, doi: 10.5040/9781509948024.
5. Borisova, V.F., (2009). Vozbuzhdeniye grazhdanskogo sudoproizvodstva [Initiation of Civil Proceedings]. Cand. Sci. (Law) Diss. Saratov. (In Russ.).
6. Bo risova, V.F., (2013). Judicial System Guarantees of Justice Accessibility in the Regular Court. Law, Legislation, Personality, 1, pp. 13–19. (In Russ.).
7. Bo risova, V.F., (2021). Electronic Justice Platforms in Civil Cases: the Status, Risks, Prospects. Arbitrazh and Civil Procedure, 4, pp. 13–17, doi: 10.18572/1812-383X-2021-4-13-17. (In Russ.).
8. Gentile, G., (2022). Autonomous but interdependent: Constitutional traditions on judicial protection and the general principle of effective judicial protection. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 29(6), pp. 685–707, doi: 10.1177/1023263X231158489.
9. Golovkova, A.Yu., (2019). Accessibility and Effectiveness of Mechanisms for the Judicial Protection of Constitutional Rights and Freedoms as the Rule of Law Indicators. Izv. Saratov Univ. (N. S.), Ser. Economics. Management. Law, 19, 3, pp. 335–343, doi: 10.18500/1994-2540-2019-19-3-335-343. (In Russ.).
10. Khabirpour, N., (2023). The Principles of Effectiveness, Effective Judicial Protection and the Rule of Law. European Human Rights Law Review. 5, pp. 477–481. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4842340 [Accessed 14.02.2025].
11. Kniazkin, S.I., (2020). Problems of the Evidence in the Framework of Judicial Review in Civil Procedure. Herald of Civil Procedure, 2, pp. 86–117, doi: 10.24031/2226-0781-2020-10-2-86-117. (In Russ.).
12. Kurochkin, S., (2020a). Civil Litigation Efficiency: Criteria and Indicators. Law. Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 4, pp. 29–154, doi: 10.17323/2072-8166.2020.4.129.154. (In Russ.).
13. Kurochkin, S.A., (2020b). Effective Access to Court: Theoretical Issues. Saratov State Law Academy Bulletin, 6, pp. 163–176, doi: 10.24411/2227-7315-2020-10169. (In Russ.).
14. Ku rochkin, S.A., (2023). Judicial Reforms and the Effectiveness of Justice. Herald of Civil Procedure, 13(4), pp. 220–241, doi: 10.24031/2226-0781-2023-13-4-220-241. (In Russ.).
15. Kurochkin, S.A., (2024). Effektivnost’ grazhdanskogo i arbitrazhnogo sudoproizvodstva [Efficiency of Civil and Commercial Litigation]. Moscow: Gorodets Publ. (In Russ.).
16. Lazarev, S.V., (2024). Sudebnoye upravleniye dvizheniyem dela v tsivilisticheskom protsesse: teoreticheskiye problemy [Court Administration of Case Movement in Civil Procedure: Theoretical Issues]. Dr. Sci. (Law) Diss. Yekaterinburg. (In Russ.).
17. Osipova, L.V., (2022). Inadmissibility of Abuse of Procedural Rights as a Separate Legal Category in the Arbitration Process. Vestnik arbitrazhnoy praktiki [Bulletin of Arbitrazh Practice], 4, pp. 38–43. (In Russ.).
18. Panteleev, V.Yu., (2018). Creating an Effective System of Protecting the Rights of Citizens is the Main Task of Judicial Reform in the Russian Federation. Bulletin of Liberal Arts University, 4(23), pp. 74–90. (In Russ.).
19. Petrukhin, I.L., Baturov, G.P., and Morshchakova, T.G., (1979). Teoreticheskiye osnovy effektivnosti pravosudiya [Theoretical Basis for Justice Effectiveness]. Moscow. (In Russ.).
20. Pleshanov, A.G., (2020). Availability of Justice and Optimization of Procedure within the Framework of a Procedural Reform (On the Example of Provisions on Terms of Case Review by First Instance Courts). Arbitrazh and Civil Procedure, 11, pp. 6–8, doi: 10.18572/1812-383X-2020-11-6-8. (In Russ.).
21. Poli, S., (2022). The Right to Effective Judicial Protection with Respect to Acts Imposing Restrictive Measures and Its Transformative Force for the Common Foreign and Security Policy. Common Market Law Review, 59(4), pp. 1045–1080, doi: 10.54648/cola2022072.
22. Porokhov, M.Yu. and Porokhova, A.N., (2015). Some Problems Arising During the Implementation of the Right to Judicial Protection. Leningradskiy yuridicheskiy zhurnal [Leningrad Law Journal], 1, pp. 247–257. (In Russ.).
23. Prechal, S., (2020). Effective Judicial Protection: Some Recent Developments — Moving to the Essence. Review of European Administrative Law, 2, Special Iss., pp. 175–190, doi: 10.7590/187479820X159307018523191874-7981.
24. Prechal, S., (2022). Article 19 TEU and National Courts: a New Role for the Principle of Effective Judicial Protection? REALaw.blog. Available at: https://wp.me/pcQ0x2-wL [Accessed 14.02.2025].
25. Safagareev, R.M. and Aseev, D.V., (2024). Problems of Increasing State Fees in Court Proceedings. Gumanitarnyy nauchnyy zhurnal [Humanitarian Academic Journal], 4-2, pp. 121–128, doi: 10.24412/2078-9661-2024-42-121-128. (In Russ.).
26. Solo v’eva, T.V., (2022). Conditions for Effective Judicial Protection in Civil Proceedings. Voprosy rossiiskogo i mezhdunarodnogo prava [Matters of Russian and International Law], 12(10А), pp. 428–434, doi: 10.34670/AR.2022.35.27.025. (In Russ.).
27. Va silev, D., (2022). Productivity and Efficiency in the Evaluation of Judicial Activity. Law and Politics, 3, pp. 49–70, doi: 10.7256/2454-0706.2022.3.34635. (In Russ.).
28. Vershinin, V.B., (2011). Sudebnaya zashchita kak kompleksnyy institut rossiyskogo prava [Court Protection as a Complex Institution of Russian Law]. Cand. Sci. (Law) Diss. Saratov. (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Borisova V.F., Vyushkina E.G. Balance of Court Protection Effectiveness and Access to Justice in the Context of Achieving Civil Litigation Goals. Kutafin Law Review. 2025;12(3):545-569. https://doi.org/10.17803/2713-0533.2025.3.33.545-569






















