"СУДОВА ПРАВОТВОРЧІСТЬ" І "СУДОВА НОРМОТВОРЧІСТЬ": ЛЕКСИКО-СЕМАНТИЧНИЙ АНАЛІЗ

The establishment of international judicial institutions, in particular the European Court of Human Rights, with its judgments binding on national legal systems, the improvement by national courts of methodological tools for researching and resolving court cases, as well as institutional and procedural reforms of judicial systems of the countries of the world have led to a significant improvement in the quality of justice in the current environment. As a result, the nature of the study of the circumstances of legal reality, as well as the depth of analysis of regulatory provisions by courts in the course of resolving individual cases, often contribute to the formation of provisions based on the results of the consideration of cases that are not inferior in content and significance to the rules of law created by the legislative and executive branches of government. This state of affairs is increasingly pushing for a scientific solution to the problem of "judicial lawmaking" and "judicial rulemaking" and providing a reasonable answer to the question of the legal ability of Ukrainian courts to create rules of law. The lexical and semantic analysis of these lexical constructions is the first step towards achieving the goal. The purpose of the article is to determine, by conducting a lexical-semantic analysis of the relevant terminology, the conceptual possibility of using the lexical constructions "judicial law creation" and "judicial rule creation" in relation to the activity of the court in the aspect of the assumption that its results in the form of legal provisions formed and recorded by the court may acquire the characteristics of regulatory normative-legal prescriptions. The author defines the methodological features of the study of the terminological constructions "judicial lawmaking" and "judicial rulemaking" and the features of the modern use of the term "court". The author makes a conditional grouping of scientific provisions on the definition of the essence of "lawmaking" and "rulemaking" within the framework of divergent and convergent approaches with further analysis of the respective positions of legal scholars. The author analyzes the provisions of the Law of Ukraine "On Lawmaking", which is coming into force, in terms of formalizing the category of "lawmaking". The scientific analysis is accompanied by the author's reference to the regulatory provisions of national legislation, the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, and the results of scientific legal research. The author establishes that the substantive instability at the doctrinal level of the categories "lawmaking" (law creation) and "rulemaking" (rule creation), as well as a broader substantive and historical interpretation of the relevant processes in general, determine the conceptual admissibility of the use of the entire range of conceptual and categorical constructs at the level of legal science, in particular, "judicial lawmaking", "judicial law creation", "judicial rulemaking" and "judicial rule creation". Moreover, from the point of view of the current situation, which is characterized by formalization of the category of "lawmaking" by the provisions of legislation, which also indirectly formalizes the related category of "law creation", it seems more optimal to use the terminological constructs "judicial law creation" and "judicial rule creation" to refer to the relevant court activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]