JURISDICTIONAL COMPETITION AS A FACTOR IN REFORMING UKRAINE'S JUDICIAL SYSTEM: A CONSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL ASPECT

Abstract

The article analyzes jurisdictional competition as one of the key factors in reforming Ukraine's judicial system within the constitutional and legal framework. It reveals the dual nature of the phenomenon: constructive (competition for the quality of justice that stimulates judicial specialization and procedural improvement) and destructive (conflict of jurisdiction that threatens the right of access to court). In the national context, the study outlines typical "borderline" collisions between civil, commercial, and administrative jurisdictions, summarizes the approaches of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court to their resolution, and emphasizes the state's duty to ensure effective judicial protection even under conditions of normative uncertainty. The article examines the case law of the European Court of Human Rights regarding violations of Article 6 of the Convention in cases against Ukraine resulting from "ping-ponging" of claims between jurisdictions, concluding that the substantive consideration of a case must prevail over formalism. It shows how the reforms of 2016–2017, the establishment of the High Anti-Corruption Court, and the liquidation of the Kyiv District Administrative Court with the creation of new specialized administrative courts became responses to the challenges of jurisdictional competition while remaining within the constitutional model of specialization and judicial hierarchy. In the comparative dimension, the study considers the phenomenon of forum shopping and the "market of jurisdictions" (in particular, the Delaware example), which highlights the risks of a "race to the bottom" while demonstrating the potential for a "race to the top" through higher standards of justice. Special attention is given to the impact of martial law and European integration: maintaining the continuity of justice through flexible redistribution of territorial jurisdiction, strengthening judicial integrity, and digitalizing court processes as prerequisites for enhancing the attractiveness of the national jurisdiction for citizens and businesses. The article formulates practical recommendations for final legislative delineation of jurisdictions, unification of judicial practice, institutional guarantees of access to justice, and the implementation of best foreign models. Jurisdictional competition is interpreted as a stimulus for systemic renewal, which should ultimately lead to the consolidation of the legal space without losing judicial specialization and quality.