scholarly journals Public interest entities in the context of accounting and auditing legislation in the wake of the globalization process

2020 ◽  
Vol 74 ◽  
pp. 01013
Author(s):  
Veronika Kňažková ◽  
Lucia Ondrušová
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Comparison Analysis ◽  
The Public ◽  
Stated Goal ◽  
Accounting Units ◽  
The Individual

Public interest entities are understood to be accounting units that are governed by the accounting legislation as well as auditing legislation. Both regulations, however, define differently the public interest entities. Part of the public interest entities are treated equally in both legislations and are considered to be public interest entities and some of them do not. this is different depending on the specific legal regulation. While accounting and auditing are separate areas of research, there is a link between them and auditing is significantly dependent on accounting because its role is to examine and analyze the accounting of a particular entity. Due to their interconnection as well as to the area of investigation itself, it would be appropriate for both legislation to treat the same group of entities as public interest entities as the individual regulations have specific requirements for this group of entities, which are public interest entities. Our aim is to clarify and present the issues in question in terms of accounting and auditing with emphasis to express its own conclusions. In order to fulfill our stated goal, we apply a method of comparison, analysis, deduction, through which we present the definitions of public interest entities in terms of accounting and auditing legislation, compare and analyze them. Finally, we formulate our own view of which entities should be considered public interest entities.

Public Servitudes for the Certain Types of Facilities Placing: Towards a Discussion on Public Interest Presence

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.P. Ushakova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Private Interest ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
Arbitrary Decision ◽  
The Right

From the standpoint of the dominant interest criterion the article examines the justification of the legislator`s decision to apply public law methods in order to regulate relations concerning the use of land for infrastructural facilities placing. The author gives the arguments in favor of understanding the public interest as the interest of the whole society as a system, rather than the interest of an indefinite range of persons or the majority of the population. The author concludes that there is the simultaneous presence in the specified legal relations and private interests of the participants of legal relations, and public interests of society as a system. Both types of interests in these legal relations are important, but in terms of different aspects of the legal impact mechanism. Public interest is important because its realization is the purpose of legal regulation of this type of legal relations, from this point of view it acts as a dominant interest. The private interest of the holder of a public servitude is important as an incentive to attract the efforts of private individuals to achieve a publicly significant goal. The private interest of a land plot owner is important from the point of view of securing the right of ownership. It is substantiated that the public servitude is not an arbitrary decision of the legislator, but an example of application of the incentive method in the land law, which provides a favorable legal regime for a socially useful activity.

Police Powers of Criminal Investigation: Principle or Pragmatism

1980 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 283-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Terry Carney ◽  
Judd Epstein
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Criminal Investigation ◽  
The Public ◽  
Police Powers ◽  
Strong Case ◽  
Efficient Detection ◽  
The Individual

This article will examine the divergence between law and practice in criminal investigation by police and consider the degree to which it may contribute to an imbalance between the interests of the individual and the public interest in the efficient detection and investigation of crime. It will be argued that the imprecision of the existing law and the failure by the legislature to accord new, tightly-defined, specific-purpose powers to the police have made a major contribution to the pressure on police to misuse existing (and often more intrusive) powers or to exercise de facto powers not authorised by law. It is contended that this pressure often arises from a desire by police to find a more practical means of attaining agreed community objectives than that provided by the artificial standards of the existing law. A strong case can therefore be advanced in favour of refurbishing police powers to accord (more closely) with present conditions, while at the same time strengthening the safeguards cast around those powers. This article will argue that case.

The Principle of Proportionality

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takis Tridimas
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Fundamental Principle ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Principle Of Proportionality ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Constitutional Adjudication ◽  
Freedom Of Action

The principle of proportionality is the most oft-invoked and, in terms of its role in constitutional adjudication, the most influential principle of EU law. The principle was developed in continental legal systems, especially in Germany and France, in the twentieth century. Even at an early stage in the development of EEC law, proportionality had already been pronounced by the Court of Justice to be a fundamental principle deriving from the rule of law and requiring in particular that ‘the individual should not have his freedom of action limited beyond the degree necessary in the public interest’.

Should Research Ethics Committees Be Observing the Law or Working by Ethical Principles?

2005 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles Warlow
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Research ◽  
Research Ethics ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Ethics Committees ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
Research Ethics Committees ◽  
Individual Interest ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Individual

Recent laws, and their interpretation, have made clinical research more difficult to do, and sometimes impossible. Furthermore the results of that research which can be done may even be unreliable. This is certainly against the public interest, and indeed the individual patient interest as well. But ethics committees have to abide by the law and so even though it is surely unethical to work against the public and individual interest that is exactly what ethics committees now have to endorse. The unintended consequences of the new regulations must be reduced by amending the law.

scholarly journals Legal Regulation of Public Governance in Finland – an Illusion of Predictable Public Administration?

2015 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 52-59
Author(s):  
Niina Mäntylä ◽  
Laura Perttola ◽  
Kristian Siikavirta
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Public Governance ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Changing Role

Legal coherence and predictable decision-making are the cornerstones of Finnish administrative law. The aim of this research is to analyze the factors that make administrative decisions unpredictable in Finland today. Why is the challenge so significant for the authorities? The factor analysis revealed six main features affecting predictability in the legal regulation of Finnish public governance: the increasing use of soft law, the devolution of government, deregulation, the changing role of the individual, the blurring of the division between the public and the private sector and the influence of international and EU-law.

scholarly journals PUBLIC INTEREST IN PUBLIC PROCUREMENT

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 1039-1062
Author(s):  
Vitaly V. Kikavets
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Public Procurement ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Political Regime ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
The Government

The basis of legal relations in public procurement are private and public interests. The purpose of the study is a substantive assessment of the authors hypothesis that the purpose of legal regulation and financial support of public procurement is to satisfy the public interest expressed in the form of a public need for goods, works, and services. The methodological basis of the study rests on historical and systematic approach, analysis, synthesis and comparative-legal methods. The results of the analysis of normative legal acts regulating public procurement, doctrinal literature and practice showed that public interest denounced in the form of public need is realized through public procurement. Public and private interests can be realized exclusively jointly since these needs cannot objectively be met individually. In general, ensuring public as well as private interests boils down to defining and legally securing the rights and obligations of the customer and their officials, which safeguards them in the process of meeting public needs through public procurement. The study revealed the dependence of the essence of public interest on the political regime, which determines the ratio of public and private interests. Public interest in public procurement is suggested to understand as the value-significant selective position of an official or another person authorized by the government, which is expressed in the form of the public need for the necessary benefit; gaining such benefit involves both legal regulation and financial security. The purpose of legal regulation of public procurement is to satisfy public interest. These concepts should be legally enshrined in Law No. 44-FZ.

scholarly journals IN SEARCH OF THE SUBJECTIVE PUBLIC LAW: CONDITIONS FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE

2019 ◽  
pp. 5-14
Author(s):  
Peter Chvosta
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
The Public ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Public Rights ◽  
Administrative Act ◽  
The Law ◽  
Administrative Jurisdiction ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Public Right

Purpose. The article is devoted to the legal figure of subjective public right in the context of legal protection in administrative matters. Methods. Based on the historical development of administrative jurisdiction in Austria and Germany in the 19th century, the function of the subjective public right is discussed in more detail: When the legislator grants citizens subjective public rights (and thus enforceable claims against the administration), the citizen can assert his or her individual interests before the courts by means of a right of defence against the state. At the same time, this results in an external legal control of the administration (compared to a mere internal administrative control by way of disciplinary measures) and thus promotes the rule of law of administrative action, which is in the public interest. Results. By pursuing his subjective public right, the citizen acting in his own interest indirectly contributes to the correct enforcement of the law. In a sense, he acts as an assistant to the public interest. The granting of a subjective public right also limits the group of persons who can take action against an administrative act, since otherwise anyone could challenge an administrative act. If the legislator has not expressly stipulated in the law which persons are entitled to a subjective public right in which respect, the determination of subjective public rights can be difficult in individual cases: When the law provides for a permit subject to certain conditions, the addressee of an administrative act is necessarily entitled to obtain a permit if the conditions required by law are met. The question is more complex in the case of persons who are not the addressee of an administrative act but who are affected by its effects. In this case, it must be determined by way of interpretation whether the legal provisions whose violation the citizen claims to have violated were passed not only to protect public interests but also, at least, in the interests of individual persons. Only then is there also a subjective public right of the individual to compliance with this provision. Conclusions. The legislator can avoid difficulties of interpretation by means of clear rules on the granting of subjective public rights. In particularly important administrative matters (e.g. approval of infrastructure projects), where the granting of subjective public rights is not sufficient to ensure judicial control of administrative acts, a larger group of persons can be granted party status.

scholarly journals Digital health and digital information in the context of big data. An ethical insight on interests

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Mirchev ◽  
A Kerekovska
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Scientific Progress ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Health Data ◽  
Individual Responsibility ◽  
Digital Information ◽  
The Public ◽  
Rational Argumentation ◽  
The Individual

Abstract Background Health data is the key link between the prospects we face in improving health services and the context of current information reality. In the field of public health, the sheer scale of data collecting, digitalization and use is already raising questions related to the ethical norms among different stakeholders. The fact that it is personal data at stake, confronts at least two views: the individual versus the public interest. The more we ease the process of health data aggregation and use, the more risks of possible harms we face. So, whose interest is a priority? Aim To consider if it is possible to balance the conflicting interests of individuals and society in the digital health era by advocating for mutual compromises and rational argumentation. Methods Ethical, documental and historical research. Results The amount of digital health related personal data transforms both opportunities for improved healthcare and research, and possible uncertainties related to improper use, harms, abuses, injustice. This nourishes individuals' doubts and potentially restricts the public interest by putting limits on future use of data. A balance between the confronting interests is needed. Granting ownership rights over data requires entirely new legal frame, since property rights hardly encompass the unique nature of information. Moreover, data is a valuable artefact, and ownership could provoke further commercialization. On the other hand, it is virtually impossible to put a separating line between commercial and ideal use of health data for care improvements and science. Our focus should be on the ideal use and essentially on insuring individual's privacy and confidentiality, but not at the expense of public benefits and scientific progress. Conclusions Health information is a powerful tool, and its utilization suggests compromises, which are possible if rational argumentation and support is provided to individuals with the aim to overcome the existing discrepancies. Key messages The appearance of digital health fully represents the dynamic information reality in which constructing a balance between different stakeholder’s interests is vital and not impossible to achieve. Healthcare prospects depend on our individual responsibility and willing to share as we have the data and the means to use and secure it, and we have the duty to do it.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document