The application of Circumstance Abuse Doctrine (Misbruik Van Omstandigheden) on Judicial Practice in Indonesia

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. 2138
Author(s):  
Agus Yudha HERNOKO ◽  
Ghansam ANAND
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Bargaining Power ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Construction

This study analyzed the abuse of circumstances as a factor that delimits the freedom of making a contract associated with the onset of the contract, not because of the casue which is not allowed. The abuse of circumstance is not only related to the content of a contract, but rather related to what had happened at the time of the inception of the contract as one of the parties feels constrained to determine their will in a contract. It concerns on the circumstances that contribute to onset of the contract (i.e., taking benefit from other’s circumstance does not cause the content or intent of a contract be not permissible, rather, it may cause the missused will be restricted). The abuse of circumstances may happen due to one’s superiority over another party. The superiority is not only economic in nature, but also psychological, or both. Misusing such superiority may cause circumstance abuse. It is due to inequality of bargaining power that the weak cannot avoid from, while the stronger party abuses the circumstance by imposing the contents of the contract that leads to the inequal advantages for both parties. In Indonesia, the abuse of circumstances is often used as a cause to abrogate a contract due to the defect of will, although it is not yet regulated in legislation but rather derived from a legal construction recognized by the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court. It is definitely differenct from Netherlands that has regulated its misbruik van omstandigheden in article 3:44 lid 1 Nieuw Burgerlijk Wetboek.

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.

Slovo of the National School of Judges of Ukraine

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Judicial Reform ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
National School ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Impact

The special edition of the national professional scientific and practical legal magazine “The Slovo of the National School of Judges of Ukraine” was published, which contains reports delivered at the online conference "Ensuring the unity of judicial practise: the legal positions of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court and standards of the Council of Europe", held on the occasion of the third anniversary of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court. time of thematic sessions and webinars for judges of each of the courts of cassation in the Supreme Court, as well as joint sessions for judges of different jurisdictions at the end of 2020. The National School of Judges of Ukraine held these events together with the Supreme Court and in synergy with the Council of Europe projects "Support to Judicial Reform in Ukraine", "Further Support for Ukraine's Implementation in the Context of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights", USAID New Justice Program, OSCE Project Coordinator in Ukraine. These are projects that support various aspects of judicial reform in Ukraine, compliance with Council of Europe standards and recommendations, offering best practices from member states to help make priorities in the national reform process. The conference and training events were attended by more than 550 participants - judges of the Supreme Court, other courts, leading Ukrainian and foreign experts, representatives of the legal community. Trainers and all structural subdivisions of the National School of Judges of Ukraine were involved, the training activities of which were identified by the CCEJ in one of its conclusions as one of the important tools to ensure the unity of judicial practice. Programs of activities included reports on the role of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court in ensuring the unity of judicial practice and the impact on the legal system; unity of judicial practice in the context of standards - improving access to justice in Ukraine: removing procedural obstacles and ensuring the right to an impartial court, approaches to identifying cases of minor complexity and cases of significant public interest or exceptional importance for a party in the context of access to court of cassation: practice the supreme courts of the member states of the Council of Europe and the European Court of Human Rights; key positions of the Supreme Court - application of the provisions of the procedural codes on the grounds for transferring the case to the Chamber, the joint chamber or the Supreme Court, the impact of its decisions on legislative activity, ensuring the specialization of courts and judges, the practice of the Supreme Court of the Supreme Court on administrative cases, the practice of considering cases of disciplinary liability of judges, conclusions on the rules of criminal law, review of court decisions in criminal proceedings in exceptional circumstances; the impact of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights on the case law of national courts and the justification of court decisions and the "balance of rights" in civil cases in its practice, the development of the doctrine of human rights protection; ECtHR standards on evidence and the burden of proof, the conclusions of the CCEJ and their reflection in judicial practice; judicial rule-making in the activities of European courts of cassation, etc. The issues raised are analyzed in the Ukrainian and international contexts from report to report, which, we hope, will be appreciated by every lawyer - both practitioners and theorists. As well as the fact that the depth of disclosure of each of the topics through the practice of application serves the development of law and contributes to the formation of the unity of judicial practice of the Supreme Court, the creation of case law is a contribution to rulemaking and lawmaking. The conversion of intellectual discourse into the practice of Ukrainian courts is an important step towards strengthening public confidence in the judiciary. And here the unifying force of the Supreme Court can be especially important, as the Chairman of the Supreme Court Valentyna Danishevska rightly remarked, speaking about the expectations of the society.

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.

PENALTIES PROVIDED FOR SERIOUS CRIMES IN THE CRIMINAL CODE OF UKRAINE

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oleksandra Skok ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Right ◽  
National Police

The statistics of the Prosecutor General's Office on registered criminal offenses in the form of serious crimes for 2020 and 2021 were reviewed. Based on this, the number of serious crimes registered by the National Police of Ukraine during the reporting periods was determined. The provisions of the current Criminal Code of Ukraine, the Criminal-Executive Code of Ukraine, the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court No 7 of October 24, 2003 are analyzed, as well as some scientific positions of domestic scientists Knyzhenko O. O are taken into account. and Berezhnyuk V. M In addition, a review of the case law of the Supreme Court of Cassation on sentencing was studied. A thorough criminal-legal analysis of the sanctions of the articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine in the part of punishments established for the category of serious crimes was carried out. Based on the analysis, it was determined which main and additional punishments are regulated in the sanctions of the articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine for the investigated category of crimes. The quantitative and qualitative indicator of sanctions for serious crimes has been determined, which include: imprisonment for a definite term; punishments alternative to imprisonment; additional penalties. Legislative and doctrinal provisions on punishments in the form of imprisonment for a definite term, restriction of liberty, fine, correctional labor, arrest are considered. The judicial practice of Ukraine in the part of certain issues related to the execution of a penalty in the form of a fine and the replacement of a penalty in the form of a fine with a penalty in the form of correctional labor is analyzed. It is established that the Criminal Code of Ukraine, in the sanctions of the articles, provides for the application to a person who has committed a serious crime, punishment in the form of imprisonment, restriction of liberty, fine, correctional labor, arrest - as the main punishment. The range of additional punishments is defined, which determine: confiscation of property, deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities and a fine.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document