CIVIL PROCEDURE REFORM IN CANADA 2010-2018

The article deals with the course "Civil Procedure in Foreign Countries", taught at PFUR (RUDN University), where the lecturers conduct research and thoroughly monitor civil proceedings, arbitration and mediation reforms in foreign countries. This article is the result of such research. (Dudin et al., 2017) It presents a general description of the most significant reforms of civil procedural law in Canada in 2010-2018. The tendency to reduce the procedural rights of parties and other participants in civil disputes is emphasized: since 2010, a number of Canadian provinces (including Ontario, Alberta, British Columbia and Quebec) have made significant amendments to their civil procedural codes aimed at facilitating the resolution of civil disputes spending less time and being less complicated. These reforms include: 1) reducing the number of documents considered by the court in the process of proving; 2) a reduction of the time allowed for oral hearings; 3) the mandatory consideration of the principle of proportionality in the procedure for disclosing evidence; 4) granting the court the right of expanded control when drawing up a plan for the conduct of the proceedings; 5) an increase in the amount that can be filed in cases with a small amount of the claim. To be able to make conclusions, the authors studied the 2015 Quebec CPC, which focuses on alternative (private) methods of preventing and resolving disputes and extending the court's powers to control the movement of cases; New Alberta Civil Procedure Law 2010 ed. 2018, which are focused on the creation of two separate litigation management systems; New Rules of Civil Procedure of the Province of Ontario ed. 2018; New rules for civil litigation in the province of British Columbia ed. 2016 and others. Conclusions are made that the reform of civil proceedings in Canada in 2010-2018 was aimed at resolving civil disputes in a less costly, time-consuming and complicated way. We shall underline that all the innovations listed above contribute to the acceleration and simplification of providing the administration of justice in civil cases. However, will the primary goal of the administration of justice - the achievement of equity - be preserved in this case? (Frolova et al, 2017) The answer to this question is not apparent. So far there is no data on how the Canadian society has taken the provisions of the reforms.