scholarly journals PROBLEMS OF QUALIFICATION OF CLAIMS OF CREDITORS AFFILIATED WITH THE DEBTOR IN BANKRUPTCY CASES

2020 ◽  
pp. 26-30
Author(s):  
Y.V. Holodenko ◽  
D.M. Nazemcev
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Positive Development ◽  
Legal Entity ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Bona Fide ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Debt Obligation

Along with the positive development of the institution of bankruptcy in Russia, there are mixed problemsin judicial practice. One such problem is the fate of the contractual claims of the controlling persons of theorganization and other affiliated creditors in the bankruptcy of the legal entity. The law does not explicitlyprohibit the financing of a corporation, through civil designs. However, problems regarding the qualificationof such financing methods arise when a society falls into bankruptcy proceedings. In this part, the courtsare faced with questions about the possibility of reclassifying the debt obligation into a relationship forthe precapitalization of society and recognizing the debt model of financing the requirement “arising fromparticipation.” This article is devoted to problems of qualification of claims of “corporate” creditors inbankruptcy cases. Various approaches of the Judicial Board on Economic Disputes of the Supreme Courtof the Russian Federation to loans issued by participants of economic companies are studied. The need toderogate from the position taken by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation is justified in order toprotect the rights of bona fide participants of economic companies.

scholarly journals Binding Nature of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation Explanations in Criminal Law

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 95-107
Author(s):  
I. A. Klepitskiy
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Nulla Poena Sine Lege ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

The question of the legal nature and the binding nature of explanations of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation remains debatable in the literature. When considering criminal cases, the courts do not always follow the decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court. It seems that the explanations of the Supreme Court, while not being a source of criminal law, are nevertheless binding on courts and officials applying the norms of criminal law. This is a general rule, to which there are exceptions. First, there are erroneous explanations of the Supreme Court, which are not based on the established judicial practice and are not supported by it. Second, there are outdated explanations of the Supreme Court that do not meet modern legal realities. Third, there are explanations of the Supreme Court, which, in relation to a particular situation, require an expansive or restrictive interpretation. In these three situations, the Supreme Court’s explanations do not bind the law enforcement officer. The binding nature of the Supreme Court’s explanations is determined by the value of the law as such. Questions of law require a uniform resolution. An alternative to a uniform interpretation of the law is arbitrary administration. Arbitrary administration is not within the competence of the judge. There is no case law in Russia. The works of legal scholars in modern Russia also cannot satisfy the need for a uniform interpretation of the law. The significance of the explanations of the Supreme Court determines the high requirements for their quality. The Supreme Court’s explanations should not directly contradict the law. The Supreme Court’s explanations should not change unless there is an urgent need to do so. The rule nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege, being an achievement of legal culture, binds the Supreme Court. By clarifying the practice of applying the law, the Supreme Court forms and preserves judicial doctrine, thereby providing legal certainty.

Theft and Fraud Committed Using Electronic Payment Systems (Regional Judicial and Investigative Practice)

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 66-79
Author(s):  
S. L. Morozov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Payment Systems ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Electronic Payments ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The advent of the electronic currency and the effecting of electronic payments has caused new forms of thefts and types of acquisitive crimes. The judicial investigative practice of criminal cases of embezzlement committed using bank cards and other types of electronic payments has encountered problems with the qualification of such acts. The author identifies the most common enforcement problemsand their causesby a retrospective study of judicial practice, the changing norms of the criminal law. At the same time, a ten-year period of work of the judicial investigating authorities was studied. On the basis of traditional general scientific methods of cognition, as a result of a system-legal analysis of the considered set of specific situations, the author gives an author's view of the complex of causes that cause a lack of uniformity in judicial investigative practice. Using the hermeneutic approach, the author paid special attention to the application by the courts of the interpretation of the criminal law by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in different years. In conclusion, ways of resolving contentious issues of qualification of thefts and fraud in the field of electronic means of payment are proposed. It has been ascertained that high-quality and uniform law enforcement can provide additional clarification on the delimitation of related and competing theft from the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. It is concluded that in general, the current concept of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation does not contain contradictions with the novels of the criminal law, but can be improved. The rationale and edition of possible additions to the relevant decision of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation are given.

Scientific Commentary on the Review of Judicial Practice on Some Issues of the Application of Legislation on Business Entities

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 27-32
Author(s):  
V. K. Andreev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Business Entities ◽  
Law Making

The article discusses the forms of clarification on matters of judicial practice by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the Presidium of the Supreme Court, as well as in the Review of judicial practice on some issues of the application of legislation on business companies dated December 25, 2019. Clarifications of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on issues of judicial practice are characterized as the positions of the courts identified in the course of studying and summarizing the judicial practice of the corresponding category of cases, which are acts of individual regulation of public relations. Focusing on Art. 6 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and Section 6, Art. 12 of the APC RF shows the validity of dividing wrong into two types of wrong: the «moderate» type of «judicial law-making and the position of the court» and the «radical» type of «judicial law-making», when the court develops the rule of law, which contradicts the constitutional principle of separation of powers. When resolving corporate disputes, it is necessary to investigate whether the charter of a non-public company does not contain the rights and obligations of its participants, which they themselves created by making a unanimous decision and including them in the charter of the company (paragraph 3 of Art. 66.3 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, paragraph 3 of Art. 14 of the Law about LLC).

scholarly journals The use of digital communication technologies in the context of a pandemic as a way to improve the effectiveness of justice

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-101
Author(s):  
E. V. Smakhtin
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Information Technologies ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article deals with the peculiarities of the activity of courts in making judicial decisions in the context of a pandemic. First of all, we are talking about the wider use of digital and information technologies in criminal proceedings, which have previously been repeatedly recommended by forensic science for implementation in judicial practice. Some recommendations of criminalistics are currently accepted by the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in its Decision dated April 08, 2020 № 821 and Review on certain issues of judicial practice related to the application of legislation and measures to counteract the spread of a new coronavirus infection (COVID-19) in the territory of the Russian Federation № 2, which provided appropriate explanations for their use in practice. In particular, we are talking about the possibility of using video conferencing systems for certain categories of criminal cases and materials that are considered urgent, although this is not provided for in criminal procedure legislation. It is concluded that it is necessary to change the current criminal procedure legislation, bring it into line with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, federal constitutional laws, federal laws and subordinate regulatory legal acts, including orders of the Judicial Department under the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals On the Issues of the Application of Part 6 of Article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 79-84
Author(s):  
N. N. Korotkikh
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article analyzes some of the controversial, in the opinion of the author, recommendations of the Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 10 of 15.05.2018 «On the practice of the courts applying the provisions of paragraph 6 Article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation». Lowering the category of crime always requires clear criteria by which the actions of the defendant could be qualified with a change in the gravity of the crime. Based on examples from judicial practice, the thesis is substantiated that “taking into account the factual circumstances of the case” and “the degree of its public danger” are evaluative e criteria and do not always allow to decide the validity of the application of part 6 article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The discrepancy between some of the recommendations contained in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the provisions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is shown. It is concluded that it is impossible to exempt a person from criminal liability on the grounds specified in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals ISSUES OF THE QUALIFICATION OF A MURDER FOR THE PURPOSES OF USING VICTIM’S ORGANS OR TISSUES (CLAUSE М PART 2 ARTICLE 105 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION)

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 46-51
Author(s):  
Andrey L. Ivanov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Human Organs ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article substantiates the solution of some of the issues of qualification of murder discussed in theory and practice in order to use human organs or tissues, the results of a study of judicial practice, in which clarifications of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on this topic were applied.

Dissemination of damaging information (defamation) as a type of civil tort: concept definition

2020 ◽  
pp. 378-382
Author(s):  
Valeriya Smorchkova
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Personal Information ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Court ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of

We consider such category as defamation, which is widespread in many foreign countries. Defamation is the dissemination of damaging information, which, however, is true. This concept has become widespread in the last century, many states have adopted special legislation that mediates relations in this area. For example, the United Kingdom has the “Defamation Act 1996” and Singapore has the “Defamation Ordinance 1960”. We emphasize that in the same 1960s in our country “the system of defamation seemed absolutely unacceptable and contrary to the spirit of society”. In the course of study, comparative legal methods are used to analyze the legislation of states with the Anglo-Saxon and Romano-Germanic legal system. Based on the study of the doctrinal points of view of scientists and the positions of higher courts, the definition of this category is formed from the position of civil tort. The following definition is proposed: “Defamation is a violation of civil legislation, which consists in the dissemination of false information damaging the honor, dignity and business reputation of a person and also the dissemination of truthful personal information, the disclosure of which violates the conservation law are listed in the intangible benefits of the citizens”. We analyze the provisions of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of February 24, 2005 no. 3 “On judicial practice in cases of protecting the honor and dignity of citizens, as well as the business reputation of citizens and legal entities”. We conclude that the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation borrowed advanced provisions from the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document