The Unity of Judicial Practice in the Light of Existing Legal Mechanisms, European Standards and Modern Technologies

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.35774/

Keywords:

judicial practice, court, justice, civil proceedings, ECtHR, the practice of the ECtHR, precedent, court decision, interpretation of law, artificial intelligence

Abstract

The relevance of this study is determined by the fact that ensuring the unity of judicial practice is a key element of a stable legal system, as it guarantees the consistency of court decisions in similar legal situations, enhances trust in the judicial system and promotes the implementation of the rule of law. Despite the effectiveness of traditional legal mechanisms, the risk of discrepancies in the interpretation and application of norms still exists, which highlights the need for innovative approaches that, in the modern context of social and technological development, hold significant potential. The combination of traditional legal mechanisms and innovative technologies makes the study particularly relevant for shaping a unified judicial practice in Ukraine.

The purpose of the study is to examine the mechanisms for ensuring the unity of judicial practice in Ukraine, taking into account national legislation, the requirements of European standards and the potential use of artificial intelligence.

To study the unity of judicial practice, such methods as the formal-logical, comparative-legal, systemic and analysis and synthesis methods were employed, allowing for a comprehensive assessment of the role of legal norms and technological tools in ensuring the consistency of court decisions.

It is concluded that the unity of judicial practice is a fundamental element of the rule of law and a guarantee of society’s trust in the judicial system. In this context, the consistency of court decisions serves not only as a tool of legal certainty but also as a necessary condition for the realization of the right to a fair trial. Ensuring the unity of judicial practice is based both on historically established legal principles, beginning with Roman law and on modern European standards.

It is argued that the mechanisms for ensuring the unity of judicial practice require constant improvement, particularly through the development of both legal and innovative tools. Therefore, under modern conditions, the possibility of integrating innovative technologies, especially artificial intelligence, into the processes of analyzing and systematizing judicial practice acquires special significance. The current level of artificial intelligence development demonstrates that it is capable not only of enhancing the efficiency of judicial proceedings but also of contributing to unified approaches in law enforcement. At the same time, its use must strictly comply with European ethical standards, ensure transparency, preserve judicial responsibility for final decisions and uphold the principles of confidentiality and judicial independence. A harmonious combination of traditional mechanisms of legal regulation with the potential of modern technologies creates promising conditions for strengthening the unity of judicial practice and increasing citizens’ trust in the justice system.

References

1. Sopilniak, V. Yu. (2025). Udoskonalennia normatyvno-pravovykh zasad zastosuvannia u tsyvilnomu sudochynstvi Ukrainy Yevropeiskoi konventsii z prav liudyny i praktyky YeSPL yak dzherela prava [Improvement of the legal and regulatory framework for the application of the European Convention on Human Rights and ECtHR practice as a source of law in civil proceedings of Ukraine]. Visnyk Odeskoho natsionalnoho universytetu - Scientific Bulletin of Odesa National University. Seriia: Pravoznavstvo, 27, Vypusk 1 (40), S. 56-63. Retrieved from https://journals.visnyk-onu.od.ua/index.php/law/article/view/495/483 [in Ukrinian]

2. Rohach L. (2021). Pytannia zabezpechennia yednosti sudovoi praktyky. Zminy do Hospodarskoho protsesualnoho kodeksu Ukrainy shchodo vdoskonalennia perehliadu sudovykh rishen apeliatsiinoiu ta kasatsiinoiu instantsiiamy [Issues of ensuring the unity of judicial practice. Amendments to the Commercial Procedural Code of Ukraine on improving the review of court decisions by appellate and cassation instances]. Retrieved from https://supreme.court.gov.ua/userfiles/media/new_folder_for_uploads/supreme/PREZ_Rogach_2021_12_03.pdf [in Ukrinian]

3. Demenchuk, M. O. (2018). Rol Verkhovnoho Sudu u zabezpechenni yednosti sudovoi praktyky v Ukraini [The role of the Supreme Court in ensuring the unity of judicial practice in Ukraine] : avtoreferat dysertatsii kandydata yurydychnykh nauk, spetsialnist. 12.00.10. Odesa. URL: https://dspace.onua.edu.ua/server/api/core/bitstreams/2ea26078-d01f-44f4-aeeb-fc1f10841287/content [in Ukrinian]

4. Bobechko, N. R. (2018). Novely kryminalno-protsesualnoho zakonodavstva Ukrainy v konteksti zabezpechennia yednosti sudovoi praktyky [Novelties of the criminal procedural legislation of Ukraine in the context of ensuring the unity of judicial practice]. Chasopys Natsionalnoho universytetu «Ostrozka akademiia» - Scientific Journal of the National University «Ostroh Academy». Seriia «Pravo», №1 (17). Retrieved from https://lj.oa.edu.ua/articles/2022/n1/22enniod.pdf [in Ukrinian]

5. Shylo, O. H. (2021). Yednist sudovoi praktyky u vymiri standartiv yakosti kryminalnoho protsesualnoho zakonodavstva Ukrainy [The unity of judicial practice in the dimension of quality standards of the criminal procedural legislation of Ukraine] : monohrafiia. Natsaonalna akademiia pravovykh nauk Ukrainy, NDI vyvchennia problem zlochynnosti im. akad. V. V. Stashysa. Kharkiv: Pravo. Retrieved from https://ivpz.kh.ua/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/%D0%9C%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%9A%D0%BE%D0%BB_%D0%84%D0%94%D0%9D%D0%86%D0%A1%D0%A2%D0%AC-%D0%A1%D0%A3%D0%94%D0%9E%D0%92%D0%9E%D0%87-%D0%9F%D0%A0%D0%90%D0%9A%D0%A2%D0%98%D0%9A%D0%98_%D0%A8%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%BE_2022.pdf [in Ukrinian]

6. Hnatkovskyi, M. (2023). Yednist sudovoi praktyky yak vymoha prava na spravedlyvyi sud [The unity of judicial practice as a requirement of the right to a fair trial]. Mizhnarodna onlain konferentsiia do 5-richchia Verkhovnoho Sudu «Implementatsiia verkhovenstva prava: rol Verkhovnoho Sudu v suchasnykh umovakh». Retrieved from https://supreme.court.gov.ua/supreme/pres-centr/news/1374711/?fbclid=IwAR10h [in Ukrinian]

7. Judgment of the ECtHR in the case of «Vinčić and Others v. Serbia» dated 02 March 2010. Retrieved from https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-95959%22]} [in English]

8. Judgment of the ECtHR in the case of «Atanasovski v. the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia» dated 14 April 2010. Retrieved from https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-96673%22]} [in English]

9. Vysnovok № 20 pro rol sudiv u zabezpechenni yednosti zastosuvannia zakonu. Konsultatyvna rada yevropeiskykh suddiv [Opinion No. 20 on the role of courts in ensuring the uniform application of the law. Consultative Council of European Judges]. Strasburh. 10.11.2017. Retrieved from https://hcj.gov.ua/sites/default/files/vysnovok_kryes_20.pdf [in Ukrinian]

10. Judgment of the ECtHR in the case of «Vrioni and Others v. Albania» dated 11 April 2011. Retrieved from https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-102131%22]} [in English]

11. Judgment of the ECtHR in the case of «Brezovec v. Croatia» dated 18 October 2013. Retrieved from https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-122432%22]} [in English]

12. Tsyvilnyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy: Zakon Ukrainy [Civil Procedural Code of Ukraine: Law of Ukraine] vid 18.03.2004 roku № 1618-ІV. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1618-15#n8001 [in Ukrinian]

13. Pro sudoustrii i status suddiv: Zakon Ukrainy [On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges: Law of Ukraine] vid 02.06.2016 roku № 1402-VІІІ. Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1402-19#Text [in Ukrinian]

14. Rieznikova, V. V. & Shcherbyna, V. S. (2019). Shliakhy vdoskonalennia mekhanizmiv zabezpechennia yednosti sudovoi praktyky v suchasnykh realiiakh [Ways to improve the mechanisms for ensuring the unity of judicial practice in modern realities]. Yurydychna Ukraina - Legal Ukraine, 12, 65-68 [in Ukrinian]

15. Vysnovok № 11 (2008) Konsultatyvnoi rady yevropeiskykh suddiv do uvahy Komitetu Ministriv Rady Yevropy shchodo yakosti sudovykh rishen [Opinion No. 11 (2008) of the Consultative Council of European Judges to the attention of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on the quality of judicial decisions]. Retrieved from https://court.gov.ua/userfiles/visn_11_2008.pdf [in Ukrinian]

16. Kontseptsiia YeSIKS [Concept of the UJICS] : zatverdzhena nakazom Derzhavnoi sudovoi administratsii Ukrainy vid 30.04.2025 roku № 178. Retrieved from https://court.gov.ua/storage/portal/dsa/normatyvno-pravova%20baza/N_178_2025_dodatok.pdf [in Ukrinian]

17. European ethical Charter on the use of Artificial Intelligence in judicial systems and their environment, 3-4 December 2018. Retrieved from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/196205/COUNCIL%20OF%20EUROPE%20-%20European%20Ethical%20Charter%20on%20the%20use%20of%20AI%20in%20judicial%20systems.pdf [in English]

18. Vysnovok KRIeS № 26 «Rukhaiuchys vpered: vykorystannia asystyvnykh tekhnolohii u sudochynstvi» [CCJE Opinion No. 26 Moving Forward: The Use of Assistive Technologies in Justice] vid 01 hrudnia 2023 roku. URL: https://hcj.gov.ua/sites/default/files/field/vysnovok_kryes_no_26_neoficiynyy_pereklad.pdf [in Ukrinian]

19. Martsenko, N. S. (2022). Vykorystannia tsyfrovykh tekhnolohii dlia pokrashchennia rezultativ tsyvilnoho pravosuddia: zarubizhnyi dosvid [The Use of Digital Technologies to Improve Civil Justice Outcomes: International Experience]. Nove Ukrainske pravo - New Ukrainian Law. Yevrointehratsiia, 57-65. Retrieved from http://newukrainianlaw.in.ua/index.php/journal/article/view/392 [in Ukrinian]

20. Drakokhrust, T. & Martsenko, N. (2022). Artificial Intelligence in the Modern Judicial System. Journal of Modern Educational Research. 1:5. DOI: 10.53964/jmer.2022005. Retrieved from https://www.innovationforever.com/article.JMER20220107 [in English]

Downloads

Published

2025-10-31

Issue

Section

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW AND PROCESS. FINANCE LAW. INFORMATION LAW. INTERNATIONAL LAW

How to Cite

Martsenko Nataliіa. “The Unity of Judicial Practice in the Light of Existing Legal Mechanisms, European Standards and Modern Technologies”. Actual Problems of Law, no. 3, Oct. 2025, pp. 38-46, https://doi.org/10.35774/.