REASONABILITY OF THE TERMS OF CONSIDERATION OF THE CASE IN THE PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITY OF JUDGES IN UKRAINE

Abstract

Abstract. The article examines the problems of practical solution by professional judges in Ukraine of evaluativeand subjective issues that arise in the process of compliance with the principle of consideration of the case withina reasonable time. Examining the terms in any legal process (criminal, civil, administrative, administrative-tort,economic), the author concluded that they are fundamentally different from the terms and terms in substantive law.The study found that first, as a rule, procedural deadlines are clearly imperative, but given the fundamentalimpossibility of setting them for all cases of life, the current legislation allows judges to determine them at theirdiscretion, subject to the exclusive legal procedure of their (terms) delineation (codes and laws) brings the domesticlegal system closer to the precedent, because judges actually become lawmakers.Second, by allowing judges to set separate procedural deadlines at their own discretion, the state requires thatthey meet the criterion of reasonableness, which is perceived at the author’s level as a term that can be used inthe professional activity of judges where universal normative standards cannot be established, accordingly, where itis necessary to use the judge’s mind and initiative.Third, the reasonableness of time limits for consideration of cases by national courts is an evaluative category,which, acting as a measure of freedom of activity of the persons concerned, however, is constantly limited bythe state at the level of certain regulations and decisions of higher courts. The problem is mainly manifested not inthe very fact of restriction of such freedom, but in the vagueness (incomprehensibility) of the criteria (conditions)established for such a procedure, as well as in the over-demanding attitude of judges in terms of predicting potentialproblems with reasonable time.