[Abel, R. L. (1985). Law without Politics: Legal Aid under Advanced Capitalism. Regents of the University of California.]Search in Google Scholar
[Au, T. I., Kinsfather, A. S. (2019). Problems of improving legislative regulations of the advocate institute in the Republic of Kazakhstan. In Actual problems of legal protection of business: challenges and risks of modernity and ways of their resolution (pp. 9–13). Kazan Federal University. Available at https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=41146600.]Search in Google Scholar
[Bakayanova, N. M. (2015). On the prospects of a lawyer’s monopoly. Questions of Modern Jurisprudence, 10–11(50), 134–140.]Search in Google Scholar
[Belik, V. N. (2009). Legal aspects of exercise of the constitutional right to competent legal assistance. Laws of Russia: Experience, Analysis, Practice, 7, 106–109.]Search in Google Scholar
[Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe (2000). Recommendation of the 21st Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on the freedom of exercise of the profession of lawyer (adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe at its 727th meeting at vice-ministerial level on 25 October 2000). Available at https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?docid=30188533&pos=3;-108#pos=3;-108.]Search in Google Scholar
[Council of Europe (2018). European judicial systems Efficiency and quality of justice (An overview). CEPEJ studies. Available at https://rm.coe.int/rapport-avec-couv-18-09-2018-en/16808def9c.]Search in Google Scholar
[Court of Iceland (1998). Law on Lawyers. Available at https://www.althingi.is/lagas/nuna/1998077.html.]Search in Google Scholar
[Davis, M. F. (2007). Human rights in the trenches: Using international human rights law in everyday legal assistance cases. Clearinghouse Review, 41, 414–426.]Search in Google Scholar
[Dunlap, B. (2013). Anyone can think like a lawyer: How the lawyers’ monopoly on legal understanding undermines democracy and the rule of law in the United States. Fordham Law Review, 82, 2817–2842.]Search in Google Scholar
[Federal Chamber of Advocates of the Russian Federation (2018). The Japanese advocate-ship model. FPA. Available at https://fparf.ru/news/fpa/yaponskaya-model-advokatury.]Search in Google Scholar
[Government of France (1971). Law No. 71-1130 of December 31, 1971 reforming certain judicial and legal professions. Available at https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/articlelc/LEGIARTI000031008982.]Search in Google Scholar
[Government of France (2023). Code of Civil Procedure. Available at https://www.legi-france.gouv.fr/codes/id/LEGITEXT000006070716.]Search in Google Scholar
[Gurbanova, N. H., Raspopin, S. V., Yurtaev, N. S., Bardokin, D. A. (2020). Topical issues of competent legal assistance in the post-Soviet space. Bulletin of the Kemerovo State University. Series: Humanities and Social Sciences, 3(15), 257–269.]Search in Google Scholar
[Hagerty, R. J. (2021). Professor Aimed to Break Lawyers’ Monopoly on Legal Services. The Wall Street Journal. Available at https://www.wsj.com/articles/professor-aimed-to-break-lawyers-monopoly-on-legal-services-11611932403.]Search in Google Scholar
[International Bar Association (2014). IBA Global Regulation and Trade in Legal Services Report 2014. International Bar Association: 2014.]Search in Google Scholar
[Jadalhaq, I. M., Abdulhay, I. E., Alqodsi, E. M., El Maknouzi, M. E. H. (2023). A systematic reviews and meta-analyses of interruption of the statute of limitations for civil claims: A comparative study of Arab legislations. Heliyon, 9(6), 16756. Available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16756.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kaluzhskikh, D. P. (2017). Lawyer’s monopoly in Russia: Pluses and minuses. Science of the Young – the Future of Russia, 1, 96–99. Available at https://elibrary.ru/download/elibrary_31738555_58442513.pdf.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kirby, T. (2022). Piercing the Lawyers’ Monopoly. The Regulatory Review. Available at https://www.theregreview.org/2022/02/09/kirby-piercing-lawyer-monopoly.]Search in Google Scholar
[Knake, R. N. (2018). The legal monopoly. Washington Law Review, 93, 1293–1337.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kratenko, M. V. (2013). Accessibility of legal assistance and some types of contracts on its rendering. In Problems when forming a legal social state in modern Russia: materials of the IX All-Russian scientific-practical conference (Vol. 2, pp. 117–121). Novosibirsk.]Search in Google Scholar
[Lavitskaya, M. I. (2020). Qualified legal assistance in some foreign states: current state and features of its provision. In International Conference on Technology and Society (pp. 14–21). All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of Documentation and Archival Business. Available at https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=44187659.]Search in Google Scholar
[Levin, L. C. (2013). The monopoly myth and other tales about the superiority of lawyers. Fordham Law Review, 82, 2611–2634.]Search in Google Scholar
[Momotov, V. V. (2017). The market of judicial representation: From experience of continental and Anglo-Saxon legal tradition. Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law, 4(65), 43–51.]Search in Google Scholar
[Parliament of Georgia (1997). Civil Procedure Code of Georgia. Available at https://matsne.gov.ge/ka/document/view/29962?publication=154.]Search in Google Scholar
[Republic of Belarus (2011). Law of the Republic of Belarus of 30 December 2011 No. 334-3 ‘On Advocateship and Advocate Activities in the Republic of Belarus’. Available at https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?docid=31101754&pos=5;-108#pos=5;-108.]Search in Google Scholar
[Republic of Kazakhstan (1995). Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan (adopted by national referendum on 30 August 1995). Available at https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?docid=1005029.]Search in Google Scholar
[Republic of Kazakhstan (2007). Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 221-III of 12 January 2007 ‘On the Procedure for Handling Applications from Natural and Legal Persons’. Available at https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?docid=30086115.]Search in Google Scholar
[Republic of Kazakhstan (2014). Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Administrative Offences of 5 July 2014, No. 235-V. Available at https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?docid=31577399.]Search in Google Scholar
[Republic of Kazakhstan (2015). Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 377-V of 31 October 2015 ‘Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan’. Available at https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?docid=34329053.]Search in Google Scholar
[Republic of Kazakhstan (2017). Expert Opinion on the Draft Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan ‘On Advocate Activity and Legal Assistance’ (Prepared by Rytis Jokubauskas, Council of Europe Expert, October 2017). Available at https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?docid=39611738.]Search in Google Scholar
[Republic of Kazakhstan (2018). Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 176-VI of 5 July 2018 ‘On Advocate Activity and Legal Assistance’. Available at https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?docid=33024087.]Search in Google Scholar
[Republic of Kazakhstan (2021). Policy Brief ‘On the Status, Role and Legal Regulation of the Representative in Civil Cases’ (4 June 2021). Available at https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?docid=37971200&pos=5;-108#pos=5;-108.]Search in Google Scholar
[Republic of Moldova (2013). Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Moldova. Available at https://www.legis.md/cautare/getResults?docid=133060&lang=ro.]Search in Google Scholar
[Republic of Moldova (2018). Code of Civil Procedure of the Republic of Moldova. Available at https://www.legis.md/cautare/getResults?docid=134478&lang=ro#.]Search in Google Scholar
[Republic of Uzbekistan (2018). Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan. Available at https://lex.uz/docs/-3517337.]Search in Google Scholar
[Rhode, D. L. (2015). The trouble with lawyers. Oxford University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Riabov, D. (2021). On revocation of the lawyer’s monopoly through introducing the professional institution of legal advisers. Reality of Politics. Estimates-Comments-Forecasts, 17(3), 155–166. Available at https://doi.org/10.15804/rop2021309.]Search in Google Scholar
[Sen, G. (2019). Beyond the JD: How eliminating the legal profession’s monopoly on legal services can address the access-to-justice crisis. University of Pennsylvania Journal of Law and Social Change, 22, 121–147.]Search in Google Scholar
[Solovyov, A. A. (2016). Qualification requirements for representatives in administrative court proceedings (foreign experience). Finance: Theory and Practice, 2(92), 137–144.]Search in Google Scholar
[Steinberg, J. K., Carpenter, A. E., Shanahan, C. F., Mark, A. (2020). Judges and the deregulation of the lawyer’s monopoly. Fordham Law Review, 89, 1315–1349.]Search in Google Scholar
[Suleimenov, M. K. (2021). Who can be a representative in civil proceedings? Available at https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?docid=37756099.]Search in Google Scholar
[Sultanov, R. R. (2021). Institute of representation in the Republic of Kazakhstan: Problems and prospects. In S. K. Leshchenko (Ed.). Justice and law enforcement: legislation and law enforcement: collection of articles. scientific tr. Vol. 2 / IPPC of judges, prosecutors, courts and justice institutions of BSU (pp. 386–394). Minsk: RIVSH. Available at https://elib.bsu.by/handle/123456789/274319.]Search in Google Scholar
[Trabucco, L. (2018). Lawyers’ monopoly: think again: The reality of non-lawyer legal service provision in Canada. Canadian Bar Review, 96, 460–478.]Search in Google Scholar
[Vereshchagin, A. N. (2017). About assessing the validity of the advocate monopoly. Economic Policy, 2, 152–179.]Search in Google Scholar
[Zaikov, D. E. (2020). Prohibition of judicial representation: Legal regulation issues and peculiarities of application. Bulletin of the Voronezh State University. Series: Law, 1(40), 155–164.]Search in Google Scholar
[Zhamburbaeva, S. (2022). Some issues of legislative regulation of the institute of judicial representation in the Republic of Kazakhstan. Bulletin of the Karaganda University. Series: Law, 1(105), 140–149.]Search in Google Scholar
