Participation of Third Parties not Making Independent Claims Regarding the Subject Matter of the Dispute in Civil Proceedings in the Light of Procedural Economy

Abstract

The author explores the issue of participation of third parties not making independent claims regarding the subject matter of the dispute in the context of achieving procedural efficiency in civil proceedings. It is noted that the current rules of civil and arbitration procedural legislation concerning third parties that do not make independent claims regarding the subject matter of the dispute are imperfect and, on the one hand, they have some potential to ensure the true implementation of the principle of procedural economy, and, on the other hand, to enhance the effectiveness of civil proceedings and the scope of safeguards applied to secure judicial protection. Joint consideration and resolution of principal and recourse claims may be treated as a key and promising technique in this regard. The author, using various methodological techniques, conducts a critical analysis of the domestic doctrine and legislation of pre-revolutionary, Soviet and modern periods, and examines foreign experience on the subject at hand. The paper substantiates the conclusion about the possibility and expediency of joint consideration and resolution of the principal and recourse claims. It proposes to apply a mechanism for considering such claims jointly with due regard to the balance of interests of persons involved in the case. It is also noted that in a number of cases it is expedient to consider the principal and recourse claims in separate court proceedings. Summing up, the author expresses the opinion that the expansion of the judicial activity of the judicial activity should be permissible not only in the case of approval by the court of the settlement agreement, but also when the judicial activity results in making a court decision. In conclusion, it is noted that the mechanism of joint consideration and resolution of principal and recourse actions proposed by the author does not infringe the safeguards of civil procedural form and allows us to eliminate “defeat in rights” for the principal respondent (regredient).