In Ukraine, in the course of implementation of the court universalization policy, the principles (foundations) of economic, civil and administrative court proceedings have been unified. On the one part, this allowed eliminating a large number of hindrances to the access to justice ensuing from artificial differences which existed between the procedural codes. But on the other part, as a result of this policy, special types of the court process have lost some of their specific features, and in this connection – also opportunities and advantages. In particular, the fundamental branch-specific principle of the economic process – the principle of responsiveness (simplicity, economy) was actually abolished. The article aims at analyzing the reasons giving rise to the principle of responsiveness (simplicity, economy) in the economic process and the implications of its abolition within the framework of the court process universalization policy. The purpose of the article is to analyze why the principle of responsiveness (simplicity, efficiency) emerged in the economic process, and its role and the implications of abolition; and also to ascertain whether it is necessary to reinstate it. The author demonstrates that the principle of responsiveness is a specific natural and historically contingent feature of the procedure according to which legal disputes are resolved in the economic sector. It is established that the main reason why the principle of responsiveness was introduced into the court process was the need to resolve commercial disputes within the shortened timeline. Such a requirement stems from the fact that behind the parties to these disputes there are public interests of entire society and the State. The author proves that simplification of legal regulation of the court process is the key to its responsiveness and, hence, its efficiency. It is shown that the principle of responsiveness is implemented not only and not so much by setting short procedural deadlines, but also by a range of other procedural measures, which together make the process as simple, logical and predictable as possible. Ukraine has inherited the Soviet system of economic dispute resolution, which entirely complied with the principles of responsiveness. However, under the impact of various objective and subjective factors in the context of permanent reformation of the judicial system, the principle of responsiveness has been gradually withdrawn from the national economic process. The last step was the judicial reform of 2017, which in fact completely removed the principle of responsiveness from the economic procedural form. The author analyzes the main reformatory decisions which have formed the modern economic process in isolation from the basic principles of responsiveness, and comes to the conclusion that the tactical gain from such innovations is much less than the overall strategic loss in the form of complications and slowdown of the economic process on the whole

List of legal documents 
 

Legislation 
1. Pro vnesennia zmin do Hospodarskoho protsesualnoho kodeksu Ukrainy, Tsyvilnoho protsesualnoho kodeksu Ukrainy, Kodeksu administratyvnoho sudochynstva Ukrainy ta inshykh zakonodavchykh aktiv [On Amendments to the Commercial Procedural Code of Ukraine, the Civil Procedural Code of Ukraine, the Code of Administrative Legal Proceedings of Ukraine and other legislative acts]: Zakon Ukrainy [the Law of Ukraine] vid 3 zovtnia 2017 r. № 2147-VIII. URL: http://zakon5.rada.gov.ua/laws/ show/2147-19 (accessed: 24.05.2018) (in Ukrainian). 
2. Pravila rassmotreniya khozyaystvennykh sporov gosudarstvennymi arbitrazhami [Rules for the consideration of economic disputes by state arbitration]: postanovleniye Sovmina SSSR [Resolution of the USSR Council of Ministers] ot 16 aprelya 1988 g. № 490. URL: http://www.libussr.ru/doc_ussr/usr_10335.htm (accessed: 24.05.2018) (in Russian). 
3. Arbitrazhnyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy [The Arbitration Procedural Code of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy [the Law of Ukraine] vid 6 lystopada 1991 r. № 1798-ХІІ. URL: http://zakon3.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1798-12/ed19911106 (accessed: 24.05.2018) (in Ukrainian). 

Cases 
4. Ukhvala Verkhovnoho Sudu [Ruling of the Supreme Court] vid 26 kvitnia 2018 r. u spravi № 916/1993/17. URL: http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/73631257 (accessed:: 24.05.2018) (in Ukrainian).

5. Ukhvala Verkhovnoho Sudu [Ruling of the Supreme Court] vid 26 kvitnia 2018 r. 
u spravi № 924/781/17. URL: http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/73699913 (accessed: 
24.05.2018) (in Ukrainian). 
6. Ukhvala Verkhovnoho Sudu [Ruling of the Supreme Court] vid 4 travnia 2018 r. 
u spravi № 914/2087/17. URL: http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/73836504 (accessed: 
24.05.2018) (in Ukrainian). 
7. Ukhvala Verkhovnoho Sudu [Ruling of the Supreme Court] vid 7 travnia 2018 r. u spravi № 909/14/16. URL: http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/73836503 (accessed: 24.05.2018) (in Ukrainian). 
8. Ukhvala Verkhovnoho Sudu [Ruling of the Supreme Court] vid 2 kvitnia 2018 r. u spravi № 910/10190/17. http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/73160756 (accessed: 24.05.2018) (in Ukrainian). 
9. Ukhvala Verkhovnoho Sudu [Ruling of the Supreme Court] vid 5 kvitnia 2018 r. 
u spravi № 922/6287/15. URL: http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/73249436 (accessed: 
24.05.2018) (in Ukrainian). 
 

Bibliography 
 

Authored books 
10. Abova T, Arbitrazhnyi protses u SRSR (poniattia, osnovni pryntsypy) [The Process of Arbitration in the USSR (Concept, Basic Principles)] (Statut 2007) (in Ukrainian). 
11. Nikolenko L, Hospodarske protsesualne pravo Ukrainy: pidruchnyk [Economic Procedural Law of Ukraine: Textbook] (Feniks 2011) (in Ukrainian). 
12. Prytyka D, Pravovi zasady orhanizatsii diialnosti orhaniv hospodarskoi yurysdyktsii ta shliakhy yikh udoskonalennia [Legal Bases of Organization of Activity of Bodies of Economic Jurisdiction and Ways of Their Improvement] (In Yure 2003) (in Ukrainian). 
13. Grebentsov A, Razvitiye khozyaystvennoy yurisdiktsii v Russii [Development of Economic Jurisdiction in Russia] (NORMA 2002) (in Russian). 
14. Shershenevich G, Uchebnik torgovogo prava [Textbook of Trade Law] (po izdaniyu 1914 g., Firma Spark 1994) (in Russian). 
15. Brintsev O ta Drizhanov O ta Shkabura Ya, U poshukakh istyny. Hospodarskyyi sud Kharkivskoi oblasti. 25 rokiv [In Search of Truth. Economic Court of Kharkiv Region. 25 Years Old] (Dim reklamy 2016) (in Ukrainian). 
16. Baluch V, Istoriya komertsiynykh sudiv: Istoryko-pravove doslidzhennya na prykladi Odeskoho komertsiynoho sudu (1808-1917) [History of Commercial Courts: Historical and Legal Study on the Example of the Odessa Commercial Court (1808-1917)] (Yurydychna literatura 2006) (in Ukrainian). 
17. Pritica D, Arbitrazhni sudy v Ukraini: istorychnyi narys ta perspektyvy rozvytku [Arbitration Courts in Ukraine: Historical Sketch and Perspectives for Development] (In Yure 1998) (in Ukrainian). 
18. Latypov N i Wasserman A, Ostraya strategicheskaya nedostatochnost’. Strana na perePut’ye [Acute Strategic Insufficiency. Country at Rewind] (Astrel’ 2012) (in Russian). 
19. Ford G, Moya zhizn’. Moi dostizheniya [My Life. My Achievements] (AST 2013) (in Russian). 

Edited books 
20. Kostiuk B (red), Hospodarske protsesualne pravo Ukrainy [Economic Procedural Law of Ukraine] (In Yure 2009) (in Ukrainian). 
21. Kharitonova E (red), Khozyaystvennoye protsessual’noye pravo Ukrainy [Economic Procedural Law of Ukraine] (Odissey 2007) (in Russian). 

Websites 
22. ‘Mikhail Kalashnikov’ (Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) accessed 24 May 2018 (in Russian). 
23. ‘Stroky v novykh protsesualnykh kodeksakh’ [‘The Lines in the New Procedural Codes’] (Facebook, 24 Traven 2017) accessed 24 May 2018 (in Ukrainian).