Three Forms of Proceedings in Economic Court Process

The procedural legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan establishes three main procedural forms for the consideration of cases:

• Action (claim) proceedings — a universal and the most comprehensive form of dispute resolution;
• Order proceedings — a simplified form applied to uncontested claims;
• Simplified proceedings — an intermediate form combining features of both and aimed at expediting case review.

Each form has its own purpose, scope of application, and procedural specifics.

1. Action (Claim) Proceedings

Action proceedings are the primary form for resolving economic disputes. They are applied when there is a contentious legal relationship and require a comprehensive judicial examination.

Key features:

• mandatory participation of the parties;
• extensive evidentiary framework;
• court hearings with oral arguments;
• review period — up to 2 months.

2. Order Proceedings

Order proceedings are used for uncontested claims of a creditor. The court issues a judicial order without summoning the parties.

Key features:

• initiated by a creditor’s application;
• decision issued without a hearing;
• review period — up to 10 days;
• the debtor may file an objection, resulting in transfer to action proceedings.

3. Simplified Proceedings

Simplified proceedings are applied when a dispute does not require complex examination. The decision is issued on the basis of written evidence, often without summoning the parties.

Key features:

• used for standard property claims;
• decision issued within 1 month;
• limited party participation, but possible if necessary;
• evidence is primarily written.

4. Comparative Characteristics of Action, Order, and Simplified Proceedings

Criterion	Action Proceedings	Order Proceedings	Simplified Proceedings
Legal Nature	Main form of dispute resolution between parties	Special form protecting uncontested creditor rights	Accelerated form for disputes of medium complexity
Grounds for Initiation	Statement of claim	Creditor’s application for a judicial order	Statement of claim (under simplified procedure)
Nature of Dispute	Contested legal relationship requiring adjudication	Uncontested claims confirmed by documents	Contested claim not requiring complex adjudication
Participation of Parties	Mandatory: claimant, defendant, third parties	No party summons	Usually no summons; may be summoned if needed
Form of Review	Full court hearing with oral arguments	Review without a hearing	Review without a hearing; often written proceedings
Evidence	All types: written, physical, witness testimony, expert, digital evidence	Written evidence only	Primarily written, sometimes digital
Review Period	Up to 2 months (may be extended by 1 month)	Up to 10 days	Up to 1 month
Judicial Act	Court decision	Judicial order	Court decision
Appeal	Appeal and cassation available	Debtor’s objection → annulment → transfer to action proceedings	Appeal under general rules
Applicability	Universal form for all economic disputes	Only for monetary and other uncontested claims	Applied to simple property disputes (lease, supply, services, bank debts)
Advantages	Comprehensive examination, strong adversarial guarantees	Speed, low cost, simplicity	Balance of speed and fairness, reduces court workload
Disadvantages	Lengthy process, procedural costs	Limited scope, risk of abuse through objections	Limited procedural rights, risk of weaker adversarial review
Examples of Cases	Corporate disputes, bankruptcy, investment conflicts	Debt collection under loan contracts, fines, mandatory payments	Debt recovery under lease, services, supply; small banking disputes

Conclusion

Action, order, and simplified proceedings form an integrated system of procedural forms in economic litigation. Their differences lie in the level of procedural complexity, duration of review, and degree of party involvement.

• Action proceedings provide the highest guarantees but are the most resource-intensive.
• Order proceedings are effective for uncontested claims but limited in scope.
• Simplified proceedings strike a balance between speed and fairness and are suitable for typical disputes.

Selecting the appropriate procedural form ensures an optimal balance between speed, cost-efficiency, and fairness in judicial review.