The article is devoted to the study of the features of the “wide civil procedure”. It is argued
that upon careful and detailed examination the parts of the summative whole do not
have common (integrative) properties. According to the author, it is difficult to point out
the integrating principle that unites the parts in question into a whole. For examples, an
analysis of the work of the labor dispute commission is used (the commission considers only
individual labor disputes, and the arbitration or notary office is not competent to handle
such disputes), as a result, the author comes to the conclusion that there is no reason to talk
about the presence of a common subject of activity and for a holistic education “a wide civil
procedure”. The same can be said about principles. For example, the adversarial principle
operates in civil and arbitration proceedings, peculiarly in the arbitration procedural
form, but it does not work in notarial proceedings and in the labor dispute commission.
In this article, the author explores the peculiarities of the legal relations between the parts
that make up the “wide civil procedure”. These links form a summative whole, but are not
multilevel, systemic, as is the case in the system of civil procedure law.
Keywords: connections; parts; “wide civil procedure”; civil procedure; notary protection;
arbitration protection; Commission for consideration of labor disputes.