The article analyzes the problems of implementing the principle of immediacy of litigation in simplified proceedings. The main attention is paid to the situation that develops if it is impossible to draw up the reasoning part of the decision by the judge who made up its resolutive part (due to prolonged illness, resignation, transfer to another position, etc.). The author criticizes the current practice of refusing to satisfy requests for a reasoned decision in such a case by another judge, appealing only the resolutive part of the decision and sending the case for new consideration under the general rules of claim proceedings. It is proposed to develop a special mechanism for replacing the judge who examined the case and made the resolutive part of the decision, which allows to maintain a balance between the need to comply with the principle of immediacy and the effectiveness of simplified proceedings.