pravoПравоприменениеLaw Enforcement Review2542-15142658-4050Dostoevsky Omsk State University10.24147/2542-1514.2017.1(2).191-206pravo-84Research ArticleПРИМЕНЕНИЕ НОРМ ПРАВА СУДЕБНЫМИ ОРГАНАМИTHE LAW ENFORCEMENT BY THE JUDGESЕвропейский гражданский процесс: текущий статус в правовой системе Европейского Союза и стран-участницEuropean civil procedure: current status within the legal system of the European Union and its member statesТереховВ. В.TerekhovV.

Кандидат юридических наук, магистр права Европейского Союза, преподаватель кафедры частного права

PhD in Law, Master of European Union Law, lecturer, Department of Private Law

victor@law-faculty.netВильнюсский университетЛитваVilnius UniversityLithuania20172906201712191206Copyright © Терехов В.В., 20172017Терехов В.В.Terekhov V.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://enforcement.omsu.ru/jour/article/view/84

УДК 347.9

Европейский гражданский процесс является понятием в достаточной степени услов-ым. Взгляды на сущность данного института характеризуются разнообразием: 1) особый (коммунитарный) режим международного частного права (или международного гражданского процесса); 2) средство сближения национальных норм гражданского процессуального права; 3) специальная система признания решений; 4) самостоятельная отрасль наднационального права; 5) совокупность всех или части из вышеприведенных качеств. Европейский гражданский процесс имеет двойственную природу. В собственном смысле слова это федеральное процессуальное право Европейского Союза. В более широком значении это совокупность тех правил, норм и принципов отправления правосудия, которые ЕС как федеративный центр принимает и для общефедерального, и для национального уровней судебной системы, обеспечивая единство пространства правосудия.

УДК 347.9

The purpose of the article is to provide a critical analysis of different approaches towards the notion of “European Civil Procedure”, to substantiate by means of legal and judicial practice, research papers a true essence and legal nature of the European Civil Procedure.The methodological basis for the study: general scientific methods (analysis, synthesis, comparison); private and academic (interpretation, comparison, formal-legal).Problems and basic scientific results: the notion of “European Civil Procedure”, which describes the process of EU Member States judicial cooperation, bears largely a conventional character. It is not used officially by the organs and institutions of the EU, or its Member States. Moreover, it assumes an unjustified monopolization of the European discourse on the side of EU’s initiatives, although Europe is not limited to that association neither in geographical, nor in a legal sense. However, the given notion has become quite colloquial and does not cause any difficulties to the beneficiaries, and thus we may use the terms “European Civil Procedure” (ECP) and “Civil Procedure of the EU” (CP EU) as synonyms.Different approaches towards the nature of the European Civil Procedure claim that it may be regarded as: (1) a separate (communitary) regime of Private International Law (or, otherwise, International Civil Procedure); (2) means to approximate national rules of Civil Pro-cedure; 3) a particular system of judicial decisions recognition; (4) an independent area of supranational law; 5) an aggregate of all or part of the qualities mentioned above.

The system of EU Civil Procedure constitutes “federal” procedural law of the Union that functions side-by-side national procedural rules. It governs those relations that go beyond the borders of one Member State, but not the EU itself. Relations between Member States and third nations are still generally out of the federal competence.We need not to forget, however, that a genuine federal center does not only introduce centralized procedures, but also approves mandatory standards for all of the levels of the regulatory system (in other words, pursues approximation). A right of any federal state to exercise such competence does not find any questions due to supremacy of its authority. Still in the EU legal order the principle of its supremacy has a limited application and it is not obvious that the introduction of general norms for the Civil Procedure come within it. The existence of different standards of justice (28 national ones and one supranational) has a negative effect on the unity of the “area of justice”, making it illusory. In order to guarantee an equal level of judicial protection everywhere in the EU a procedural “bill of rights” is required, and it needs to be adopted at the “highest level” of the system.Conclusions. The EU Civil Procedure has a dual nature. In its own (narrow) sense it is a body of federal procedural law of the EU that is applied when a cross-border situation of intracommunity character comes into being. In a broader sense, it is also a combination of norms, rules and principles of justice that are adopted by the EU as a federal center for both community-wide and national levels of the judicial system in order to guarantee the unity to the area of justice. In the ideal case, the European area of justice has to be a coherent, unified and internally consistent system. Reality is, however, far from that image, since there are multiple problems of both legal and political nature that hinder the implementa-tion of these brave ideas.

Европейский гражданский процессстандарты судопроизводстваевропейское пространство правосудияРегламенты ЕСДирективы ЕСгармонизация законодательстваевропеизациятрансграничное действиесближение национальных нормпризнание и исполнение решенийEuropean Civil Procedurestandards of court proceedingsEuropean area of justiceEU RegulationsEU Directivesharmonization of legislationEuropeanizationcross-border effectapproximation of national rulesrecognition and enforcement of judgmentsReferencesFreudenthal M. The Future of European Civil Procedure / M. Freudenthal // Electronic Journal of Comparative Law. – 2003. – Vol. 7.5. – URL: http://www.ejcl.org/ejcl/75/art75-6.html (дата обращения: 26.01.2014).Freudenthal M. The Future of European Civil Procedure. Electronic Journal of Comparative Law, 2003, Vol. 7.5. Available at: http://www.ejcl.org/ejcl/75/art75-6.html (Date of access: 26.01.2014).Kramer X.E. Cross-Border Enforcement in the EU: Mutual Trust Versus Fair Trial? Towards Principles of European Civil Procedure / X.E. Kramer // International Journal of Procedural Law. – 2011. – Vol. 2. – P. 202–230.Kramer X.E. Cross-Border Enforcement in the EU: Mutual Trust Versus Fair Trial? Towards Principles of European Civil Procedure. International Journal of Procedural Law, 2011, Vol. 2, pp. 202–230.Mańko R. Europeanisation of Civil Procedure: towards Common Minimum Standards? / R. Mańko // Euro-pean Parliamentary Research Service. – 2015. – P. 1–29.Mańko R. Europeanisation of Civil Procedure: towards Common Minimum Standards? European Parliamen-tary Research Service, 2015. 29 p. Available at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/ 2015/559499/EPRS_IDA%282015%29559499_EN.pdf. DOI: 10.2861/670.Šinová R. Handbook of European Civil Procedure Law / R. Šinová, L. Valentová. – Olomouc, 2012. – 175 p.Šinová R., Valentová L. Handbook of European Civil Procedure Law. Olomouc, 2012. 175 p.Juenger F. Some Comments on European Procedural Harmonization / F. Juenger // American Journal of Comparative Law. – 1997. – Vol. 45(4). – P. 931–937.Juenger F. Some Comments on European Procedural Harmonization. American Journal of Comparative Law, 1997, vol. 45(4), pp. 931–937.van der Grinten P. Challenges for the Creation of a European Law of Civil Procedure / P. van der Grinten // Civil Justice Review. – 2007. – Vol. 3. – P. 65–70.van der Grinten P. Challenges for the Creation of a European Law of Civil Procedure. Civil Justice Review, 2007, vol. 3, pp. 65–70.Storskrubb E. Civil Procedure and EU Law: a Policy Area Uncovered / E. Storskrubb. – Oxford: Oxford Univer-sity Press, 2008. – 184 p.Storskrubb E. Civil Procedure and EU Law: a Policy Area Uncovered. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2008. 184 p.Hess B. The Integrating Effect of European of European Civil Procedure Law / B. Hess // European Journal of Law Reform. – 2002. – Vol. 4. – P. 3–17.Hess B. The Integrating Effect of European of European Civil Procedure Law. European Journal of Law Reform, 2002, vol. 4, pp. 3–17.Nekrošius V. Europos Sąjungos civilinio proceso teisė (pirma dalis) / V. Nekrošius. – Vilnius: Justitia, 2009. – 304 p.Nekrošius V. Europos Sąjungos civilinio proceso teisė (pirma dalis). Vilnius, Justitia Publ., 2009. 304 p.Гребенцов А.М. Унификация правил подсудности гражданских дел международного характера в странах Европы / А.М. Гребенцов // Арбитражный и гражданский процесс. – 2003. – № 1. – С. 34–44.Grebentsov A.M. The unification of rules of jurisdiction of civil cases of an international character in Europe. Arbitrazhnyi i grazhdanskii protsess = Arbitrazh and Civil Procedure, 2003, no. 1, pp. 34–44. (in Russ.).Stewart D. Private International Law: a Dynamic and Developing Field / D. Stewart // University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law. – 2009. – Vol. 30(4). – P. 1121–1131.Stewart D. Private International Law: a Dynamic and Developing Field. University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law, 2009, vol. 30(4), pp. 1121–1131. 12. Kontrauskas R. Tarptautinis civilinis procesas: samprata ir vieta nacionalinės teisės sistemoje. Jurispru-dencija, 2008, no. 7(109), pp. 70–75.Kontrauskas R. Tarptautinis civilinis procesas: samprata ir vieta nacionalinės teisės sistemoje / R. Kontrauskas // Jurisprudencija. – 2008. – № 7(109). – P. 70–75.Bayraktaroglu G. Harmonization of Private International Law at Different Levels: Communitarization v. International Harmonization. European Journal of Law Reform, 2003, vol. 5, pp. 111–150.Bayraktaroglu G. Harmonization of Private International Law at Different Levels: Communitarization v. International Harmonization / G. Bayraktaroglu // European Journal of Law Reform. – 2003. – Vol. 5. – Р. 111–150.Bogdan M. Private International Law as Component of the Law of the Forum: General Course. Hague, Hague Academy of International Law, 2012. 352 p.Bogdan M. Private International Law as Component of the Law of the Forum: General Course / M. Bogdan. – Hague: Hague Academy of International Law, 2012. – 352 p.Collier J. Conflict of Laws. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2001. 403 p.Collier J. Conflict of Laws / J. Collier. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. – 403 p.Zharko A.L. Recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in England, Cand. Diss. Moscow, 2006. 187 p. (in Russ.).Жарко А.Л. Признание и исполнение иностранных судебных решений в Англии: дис. … канд. юрид. наук / А.Л. Жарко. – М., 2006. – 187 с.Boguslavskiy M.M. Private International law. Moscow, Yurist Publ., 2005. 604 p. (in Russ.).Богуславский М.М. Международное частное право: учебник / М.М. Богуславский. – М.: Юрист, 2005. – 604 с.Saenko A.V. Sources of the international civil procedural law. Probely v rossiiskom zakonodatel'stve = Gaps in Russian legislation, 2012, no. 3, pp. 92–95. (in Russ.).Саенко А.В. Источники международного гражданского процессуального права / А.В. Саенко // Пробелы в российском законодательстве. – 2012. – № 3. – С. 92–95.Salma M. On the evolution of the concept of European law of civil procedure. Collected papers of Novi Sad Faculty of Law, 2007, no. 1–2, pp. 187–198. (in Serbian).Салма М. О еволуциjи концепта европског грађанског процесног права / М. Салма // Зборник радова Правног факултета у Новом Саду. – 2007. – № 1–2. – С. 187–198.Storskrubb E. Civil Justice – a Newcomer and an Unstoppable Wave, in: de Búrca G., Craig P. (eds.). The Evolution of EU Law. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2011, pp. 309–330.Storskrubb E. Civil Justice – a Newcomer and an Unstoppable Wave / E. Storskrubb // The Evolution of EU Law / Eds.: G. de Búrca, P. Craig. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. – Р. 309–330.Kramer X.E. Harmonizing of Civil Procedure and the Interaction with Private International Law, in: Kra-mer X.E., van Rhee C.H. (eds.). Civil Litigation in a Globalising World. Hague, Asser press, Springer, 2012, pp. 121–139.Kramer X.E. Harmonizing of Civil Procedure and the Interaction with Private International Law / X.E. Kramer // Civil Litigation in a Globalising World / Eds.: X.E. Kramer, C.H. van Rhee. – Hague: Asser press: Springer, 2012. – P. 121–139.Boele-Woelki K. Unifying and Harmonizing Substantive Law and the Role of Conflict of Laws. Leiden, Brill, 2010. 288 p.Boele-Woelki K. Unifying and Harmonizing Substantive Law and the Role of Conflict of Laws / K. Boele-Woelki. – Leiden: Brill, 2010. – 288 p.Kramer X. Towards ELI-UNIDROIT Model Rules of Civil Procedure: Basic Premises and Challenges. Bay Area Civil Procedure Forum, Hastings (San Francisco), 19 April 2016.Kramer X. Towards ELI-UNIDROIT Model Rules of Civil Procedure: Basic Premises and Challenges / X. Kramer // Bay Area Civil Procedure Forum, Hastings (San Francisco), 19 April 2016.Krymskiy D.I. The simplified productions in civil process of foreign countries, Cand. Diss. Thesis. Moscow, 2011. 26 p. (in Russ.).Крымский Д.И. Упрощенные производства в гражданском процессе зарубежных стран: автореф. дис. … канд. юрид. наук / Д.И. Крымский. – М.: МГУ, 2011. – 26 c.Kramer X. The Structure of Civil Proceedings and Why it Matters: Exploratory Observations on Future ELIUNIDROIT European Rules of Civil Procedure. Uniform Law Review, 2014, vol. 19(2), pp. 218–238.Kramer X. The Structure of Civil Proceedings and Why it Matters: Exploratory Observations on Future ELIUNIDROIT European Rules of Civil Procedure / X. Kramer // Uniform Law Review. – 2014. – Vol. 19(2). – P. 218–238.Guinchard E. L'Europe, la procédure civile et le créancier: l'injonction de payer européenne et la procédure européenne de règlement des petits litiges. Revue trimestrielle de droit commercial et de droit économique, 2008, pp. 465–483.Guinchard E. L'Europe, la procédure civile et le créancier: l'injonction de payer européenne et la procédure européenne de règlement des petits litiges / E. Guinchard // Revue trimestrielle de droit commercial et de droit économique. – 2008. – P. 465–483.Kramer X. Enhancing Enforcement in the European Union. The European Order for Payment Procedure and its Implementation in the Member States, Particularly in Germany, the Netherlands and England, in: van Rhee C.H., Uzelac A. (eds.). Enforcement and Enforceability. Tradition and Reform. Portland, Intersentia, 2010, pp. 17–40.Kramer X. Enhancing Enforcement in the European Union. The European Order for Payment Procedure and its Implementation in the Member States, Particularly in Germany, the Netherlands and England / X. Kramer // En-forcement and Enforceability. Tradition and Reform / Eds.: C.H. van Rhee, A. Uzelac. – Portland: Intersentia, 2010. – P. 17–40.Nekrošius V. Europos Sąjungos sumariniai procesai - ar esame kelyje į bendrą Europos Sąjungos civilinį procesą?, in: Teisė besikeičiančioje Europoje. Liber Amicorum Pranas Kūris. Vilnius, Mykolo Romerio universitetas, 2008, pp. 787–798.Nekrošius V. Europos Sąjungos sumariniai procesai - ar esame kelyje į bendrą Europos Sąjungos civilinį procesą? / V. Nekrošius // Teisė besikeičiančioje Europoje. Liber Amicorum Pranas Kūris. – Vilnius: Mykolo Romerio universitetas, 2008. – P. 787–798.Kramer X. Procedure Matters: Construction and Deconstruction in European Civil Procedure. Rotterdam, 2013. 30 p.Kramer X. Procedure Matters: Construction and Deconstruction in European Civil Procedure / X. Kramer. – Rotterdam, 2013. – 30 p.Tulibacka M. Europeanization of Civil Procedures: in Search of a Coherent Approach. Common Market Law Review, 2009, vol. 4, pp. 1527–1565.Tulibacka M. Europeanization of Civil Procedures: in Search of a Coherent Approach / M. Tulibacka // Common Market Law Review. – 2009. – Vol. 4. – P. 1527–1565.Reding V. Strengthening Mutual Trust: Towards a True European Area of Civil Justice, Public Lecture. Luxembourg, Max Planck Institute Luxembourg (MPIL), 25 March 2014.Reding V. Strengthening Mutual Trust: Towards a True European Area of Civil Justice: Public Lecture. Max Planck Institute Luxembourg (MPIL). Luxembourg. 25 March 2014. – Р. 1–4.Cadiet L., Jeuland E., Amrani-Mekki S. (eds.). Droit processuel civil de l’Union Européenne. Paris, Lexis Nexis, 2011. 350 p.Droit processuel civil de l’Union Européenne / Eds.: L. Cadiet, E. Jeuland et S. Amrani-Mekki. – Paris: Lexis Nexis, 2011. – 350 p.Basedow J. The Communitarisation of Private International Law – Introduction. Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht, 2009, vol. 73, pp. 455–460.Basedow J. The Communitarisation of Private International Law – Introduction / J. Basedow // Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht. – 2009. – Vol. 73. – P. 455–460.Storme M. A Single Civil Procedure for Europe: A Cathedral Builders’ Dream. Ritsumeikan Law Review, 2005, no. 22, pp. 87–100.Storme M. A Single Civil Procedure for Europe: A Cathedral Builders’ Dream / M. Storme // Ritsumeikan Law Review. – 2005. – № 22. – P. 87–100.Kapustin A.Ya. International Law Foundations of the Institutional System of Eurasian Integration. Zhurnal rossiiskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2013, no. 10, pp. 116–121. (in Russ.).Капустин А.Я. Международно-правовые основы институционной системы евразийской интеграции / А.Я. Капустин // Журнал российского права. – 2013. – № 10. – С. 116–121.Nicolae-Horia T. How Far Have We Reached in European Cooperation in Civil Matters? A View on European Enforcement. CES Working Papers, 2015, vol. VII, iss. 2A, pp. 637–647.Nicolae-Horia T. How Far Have We Reached in European Cooperation in Civil Matters? A View on European Enforcement / T. Nicolae-Horia // CES Working Papers. – 2015. – Vol. VII(2A). – P. 637–647.Vernadaki Z. EU Civil Procedure and Access to Justice after the Lisbon Treaty: Perspectives for a Coherent Approach, PhD Thesis. London, University College London, 2013. 296 p.Vernadaki Z. EU Civil Procedure and Access to Justice after the Lisbon Treaty: Perspectives for a Coherent Approach: PhD Thesis. – London: University College London, 2013. – 296 p.Loredo M. ¿Hacia un Derecho procesal europeo? InDret, 2006, vol. 1, pp. 1–24.Loredo M. ¿Hacia un Derecho procesal europeo? / M. Loredo // InDret. – 2006. – Vol. 1. – P. 1–24.Chevychalova Zh. Unification of conflict norms in European Union law. Teorіja і praktika pravoznavstva = Theory and practice of jurisprudence, 2013, vol. 2, no. 4. (in Ukranian).Чевичалова Ж.В. Уніфікація колізійних норм у праві Європейського Союзу / Ж.В. Чевичалова // Теорія і практика правознавства. – 2013. – Т. 2, № 4.Entin L.M. (ed.). European law. European Union law and the legal protection of human rights. Moscow, Eksmo Publ., 2007. 960 p. (in Russ.).Европейское право. Право Европейского Союза и правовое обеспечение защиты прав человека / под ред. Л.М. Энтина. – М.: Эксмо, 2007. – 960 с.Mikhaleva T.N. On target installations in the context of development of integration law (for example, the European Union and the Eurasian community), in: Actual problems of international public and international private law, scientific collection. Minsk, BSU Publ., 2013, vol. 5, pp. 231–238. (in Russ.).Михалева Т.Н. О целевых установках в контексте формирования интеграционного права (на примере Европейского союза и Евразийского сообщества) / Т.Н. Михалева // Актуальные проблемы международного публичного и международного частного права: сб. науч. тр. – Вып. 5. – Минск: БГУ, 2013. – С. 231–238.Nersesyants V.S. General theory of law and state. Moscow, Norma Publ., 2001. 520 p. (in Russ.).Нерсесянц В.С. Общая теория права и государства / В.С. Нерсесянц. – М.: Норма, 2001. – 520 с.Lazarev V.V. (ed.). General theory of law and state. Moscow, Yurist Publ., 2002. 520 p. (in Russ.).Общая теория права и государства: учебник / под ред. В.В. Лазарева. – М.: Юрист, 2002. – 520 с.Dossenrode S. Approaching the European Federation? London, Routledge, 2007. 232 p.Dossenrode S. Approaching the European Federation? / S. Dossenrode. – London: Routledge, 2007. – 232 p.Scutaru M.S. Globalization and Interregionalism. Research and Science Today, 2014, vol. 7(1), pp. 81–88.Scutaru M.S. Globalization and Interregionalism / M.S. Scutaru // Research and Science Today. – 2014. – Vol. 7(1). – Р. 81–88.Postnikova E.V., Heymann J. Federalism in International Private Law of European Union. Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki = Law. Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 2015, no. 4, pp. 147–164. (in Russ.).Постникова Е.В. Федерализм в международном частном праве Европейского Союза / Е.В. Постникова, Ж. Эйманн // Право. Журнал Высшей школы экономики. – 2015. – № 4. – С. 147–164.Schmitter P. Examining the Present Euro-Polity with the Help of Past Theories, in: Marks G., Scharpf F.W. et al. (eds.). Governance in the European Union. London, SAGE Publ., 1996, pp. 1–15.Schmitter P. Examining the Present Euro-Polity with the Help of Past Theories / P. Schmitter // Governance in the European Union / Eds.: G. Marks et al. – London: SAGE Publ., 1996. – P. 1–15.Brand R. The European Union’s New Role in International Private Litigation. Loyola University Chicago In-ternational Law Review, 2005, vol. 2(2), pp. 277–293.Brand R. The European Union’s New Role in International Private Litigation / R. Brand // Loyola University Chicago International Law Review. – 2005. – Vol. 2(2). – P. 277–293.Moravcsik A. Federalism in the European Union: Rhetoric and Reality, in: Nicolaidis K., Howse R. (eds.). The Federal Vision: Legitimacy and Levels of Governance in the United States and the European Union. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2001, pp. 163–164.Moravcsik A. Federalism in the European Union: Rhetoric and Reality / A. Moravcsik // The Federal Vision: Legitimacy and Levels of Governance in the United States and the European Union / Ed. by K. Nicolaidis, R. Howse. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001. – P. 163–164.Tömmel I. The European Union – a Federation sui generis?, in: Laursen F. (ed.). The EU and Federalism: Polities and Policies Compared. Farnham, Ashgate, 2011, pp. 41–56.Tömmel I. The European Union – a Federation sui generis? / I. Tömmel // The EU and Federalism: Polities and Policies Compared / Ed.: F. Laursen. – Farnham: Ashgate, 2011. – Р. 41–56.Bideleux R. Introduction: European Integration and Disintegration, in: Bideleux R., Taylor R. (eds.). European Integration and Disintegration: East and West. London, Routledge, 2002, p. 1–9.Bideleux R. Introduction: European Integration and Disintegration / R. Bideleux // European Integration and Disintegration: East and West / Eds.: R. Bideleux, R. Taylor. – London: Routledge, 2002. – P. 1–9.Pobedinskii I. Federalism's role in European integration theory. Izvestiya Rossiiskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta im. A.I. Gertsena = Izvestia: Herzen University Journal of Humanities & Science, 2008, no. 67, pp. 210–215. (in Russ.).Побединский И.М. Роль федерализма в теории европейский интеграции / И.М. Побединский // Известия Российского государственного педагогического университета им. А.И. Герцена. – 2008. – № 67. – С. 210–215.Boiko Yu.P. The conceptual basis of federalism in the legal science. Yuridicheskaya nauka = Juridical Science, 2011, no. 3, pp. 8–11. (in Russ.).Бойко Ю.П. Концептуальные основы федерализма в юридической науке / Ю.П. Бойко // Юридическая наука. – 2011. – № 3. – С. 8–11.Prokhorov V.A. About some aspects of consideration of federal states and allied formations of Antiquity and the Middle Ages. Al'manakh sovremennoi nauki i obrazovaniya = Almanac of Modern Science and Education, 2010, no. 3(34), pt. II, pp. 52–54. (in Russ.).Прохоров А.В. О некоторых аспектах рассмотрения федеративных государств и союзных образова-ний античности и средневековья // Альманах современной науки и образования. – 2010. – № 3(34). – Ч. II. – С. 52–54.Burgess M. Federalism and the European Union: the Building of Europe (1950-2000). London, Routledge, 2002. 290 р.Burgess M. Federalism and the European Union: the Building of Europe (1950–2000) / M. Burgess. – London: Routledge, 2002. – 290 р.Wolinetz S. Comparing the Incomparable: Treating the EU in Comparative Context, in: Laursen F. (ed.). The EU and Federalism: Polities and Policies Compared. Farnham, Ashgate, 2011, pp. 27–39.Wolinetz S. Comparing the Incomparable: Treating the EU in Comparative Context / S. Wolinetz // The EU and Federalism: Polities and Policies Compared / Ed.: F. Laursen. – Farnham: Ashgate, 2011. – P. 27–39.Kelmen R. Build to Last? The Durability of EU Federalism, in: Meunier S., McNamara K. (eds.). Making History: State of the European Union. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2007, pp. 51–66.Kelmen R. Build to Last? The Durability of EU Federalism / R. Kelmen // Making History: State of the Euro-pean Union / Eds.: S. Meunier, K. McNamara. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. – P. 51–66.Behr V. A unified and harmonised European law and its impact on third countries. Baltiiskii region, 2011, no. 3, pp. 13–24. (in Russ.).Бер Ф. Унифицированное и гармонизированное европейское право и его влияние на третьи государ-ства / Ф. Бер // Балтийский регион. – 2011. – № 3. – С. 13–24.Baca W.M.K. The Principle of Mutual Recognition of Judicial Decisions in EU Law in the Light of the ‘Full Faith and Credit’ Clause of the US Constitution. Available at: http://www.comunidadandina.org/BDA/docs/CAN-INT-0061.pdf (date of access: 21.12.2015).Baca W.M.K. The Principle of Mutual Recognition of Judicial Decisions in EU Law in the Light of the ‘Full Faith and Credit’ Clause of the US Constitution / W.M.K. Baca. – URL: http://www.comunidadandina.org/ BDA/docs/CAN-INT-0061.pdf (дата обращения: 21.12.2015).Get'man-Pavlova I.V. Private International law. Moscow, Eksmo Publ., 2005. 752 p. (in Russ.).Гетьман-Павлова И.В. Международное частное право: учебник / И.В. Гетьман-Павлова. – М.: Эксмо, 2005. – 752 с.Gorywoda L., Hatzimihail N., Nuyts A. Introduction: Market Regulation, Judicial Cooperation and Collective Redress, in: Nuyts A., Hatzimihail N. (eds.). Cross-Border Class Actions: The European Way. Munich, Sellier European Law Publishers, 2013, pp. 1–58.Gorywoda L. Introduction: Market Regulation, Judicial Cooperation and Collective Redress / L. Gorywoda, N. Hatzimihail, A. Nuyts // Cross-Border Class Actions: The European Way / Eds.: A. Nuyts, N. Hatzimihail. – Munich: Sellier European Law Publishers, 2013. – Р. 1–58.Mikhailova S.A. Legal regulation of judicial cooperation in civil, commercial and family matters in the European Union, Cand. Diss. Thesis. Moscow, 2012. 25 p. (in Russ.).Михайлова С.А. Правовое регулирование сотрудничества судебных органов по гражданским, торговым и семейным делам в рамках Европейского Союза: автореф. дис. … канд. юрид. наук. – М., 2012. – 25 с.Follesdal A., Hix S. Why There is a Democratic Deficit in the EU: A Response to Majone and Moravcsik. Journal of Common Market Studies, 2006, vol. 44(3), pp. 533–562.Follesdal A. Why There is a Democratic Deficit in the EU: A Response to Majone and Moravcsik / A. Follesdal, S. Hix // Journal of Common Market Studies. – 2006. – Vol. 44(3). – P. 533–562.Jano D. Understanding the “EU Democratic Deficit”. A Two Dimension Concept on a Three Level-of-analysis. Politikon: The IAPSS Journal of Political Science, 2008, vol. 14(1), pp. 57–70.Jano D. Understanding the “EU Democratic Deficit”. A Two Dimension Concept on a Three Level-of-analysis / D. Jano // Politikon: The IAPSS Journal of Political Science. – 2008. – Vol. 14(1). – P. 57–70.Jano D. Understanding the “EU Democratic Deficit”. A Two Dimension Concept on a Three Level-of-analysis / D. Jano // Politikon: The IAPSS Journal of Political Science. – 2008. – Vol. 14(1). – P. 57–70.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.