scholarly journals The Importance Of The General Principles Of European Union Law In Ensuring Public And Private Interests In Environmental Relations

2021 ◽  
pp. 78-89
Author(s):  
H.V. Moroz
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
European Court ◽  
Legitimate Expectations ◽  
Environmental Relations ◽  
Principle Of Proportionality

The article is aimed at studying the content of the general principles of European Union (EU) law, their importance in ensuring public and private interests in environmental relations. It is argued that the principles of law are based on public interests and needs, so the most important characteristic of the principles of law is their ability to put emphasis on the most important values of public life. It is established that the full potential of the principles of law is best manifested in the administration of justice, most clearly reflected in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, less perfectly - in the judicial system of Ukraine. The general principles common to the legal systems of the EU member states are the following: 1) the principle of proportionality; 2) the principle of legal certainty; 3) the principle of legitimate expectations. Performing its functions, the state may intervene in the private sphere within acceptable limits, and the criteria of the principle of proportionality are used to optimize such intervention in order to satisfy the general public interest. The following criteria are defined: 1) the legality of intervention; 2) a legitimate purpose (justification of intervention by the general interest); 3) a fair balance between the interests of property rights and public interests. The intervention should ideally be proportionate, measured, optimal and easy for the entity. In essence, this principle is designed to control the law not only in terms of the legitimacy of the influence of the authorities on fundamental rights but also on its balance in general. Legal certainty requires not only the promulgation of adopted laws or other regulations but also the relative clarity of their content so that individuals can predict and determine their behavior, the limits of manifestation and realization of their interests. The principle of legitimate expectations (reasonable predictability of court decisions) in the procedural sense applies to uniform and consistent law enforcement practice, avoidance of selective justice. The use of the concept of legitimate expectations is effective for application in cases of the protection of private property rights as well as the right to public property and public interests. It is allowed to limit the principle of protection of legitimate expectations, for example, if there is an overriding public interest, which is applicable in terms of environmental relations. The article argues that the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, as a source of law, provides a legal interpretation of substantive and procedural norms that would be vague without practical explanation. In the meantime, it is argued that in the process of approximating the environmental norms of Ukraine with EU law, the specifics of the environmental sphere and the competitive nature of the interests of entities that implement the corresponding regulations have to be considered.

scholarly journals BALANCE OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE INTERESTS AND LEGAL CERTAINTY IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS

2021 ◽  
pp. 27-30
Author(s):  
I.V. Rekhtina
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
National Level ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
Private And Public

The article examines how the principle of legal certainty can serve as a criterion in determiningthe balance and balance of private and public interests in the consideration of cases in court. Russianjurisprudence shows that, at the national level, there is an imbalance in the private and public interest inconsiderations, in which priority is often improperly given to public interest. The principle of legal certaintymay serve as a criterion for finding this balance, taking into account the jurisprudence of the European Courtof Human Rights.

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 Protection of public interests by narrowing private interests: where is the limit?

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (38) ◽  
pp. 148-157
Author(s):  
Olga Klepikova ◽  
Viktoriia Kachuriner ◽  
Volodymyr Makoda ◽  
Inha Kryvosheyina ◽  
Vadym Popeliuk
Keyword(s):  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
The People ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
Restrictive Measures

The coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) has posed many challenges to the international community. In a pandemic, governments make complex decisions every day (respond quickly to emerging difficulties), implement effective quarantine measures that affect the public and private interests of the people. Such decisions are also made by such supranational entities as the European Union. With this in mind, it is essential to analyze the interaction and balance of private and public interests in EU law in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic. The work aims to analyze the balance between private and public interests in EU law in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic. Research methods are such methods as dialectical, historical, idealization, analysis, synthesis, abstraction, system, formalization, comparison, and modeling. As a result of the study, the authors concluded that the search for a balance between public and private interests is in all areas and mostly applies to human rights and, in a pandemic, these powers are enshrined in major international treaties and national regulations, with reservations about their possible limitation under exceptional circumstances. At the same time, ensuring the balance of private and public interests is possible only if the rule of law is fulfilled in the implementation of restrictive measures, proportionality, and public necessity.

scholarly journals Currency circulation and its organization in the Russian Federation as a public need and interest

2021 ◽  
pp. 47-55
Author(s):  
Oleg Mikhailovich Krylov
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Public Life ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
Legislative Framework ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation

The subject of this research is the categories of “public need” and “public interest”. The object is the currency circulation and its organization. The author examines the elements of currency circulation, which represent independent public needs with corresponding public interests in its organization. Special attention is given to interrelation between the public needs in currency circulation and public interests, which serves as the legislative framework for currency circulation and observance of the balance of public and private interests in organization of currency circulation. The conclusion is drawn on the representatives of public interest in currency circulation and interdependence of public needs in currency circulation on the corresponding public interests in its organization. The author also formulates a number of interesting conclusions on interrelation between public needs in currency circulation, public interests and needs in other spheres of public life and organization of currency circulation, which serve as the legislative framework for currency circulation and observance of balance of public and private interests in organization of currency circulation. The novelty of this research consists in determination of the content of public interest in currency circulation, as well as in establishment of correlation with public interests and needs in other spheres of public life.

‘A Missing Piece of European Emergency Law: Legal Certainty and Individuals’ Expectations in the EU Response to the Crisis’

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 265-293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pablo Martín Rodríguez
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Legitimate Expectations ◽  
Mixed Nature ◽  
The Eu

The principle of legal certainty and legitimate expectations as a legal tool for individuals in EU law – the mixed nature of EU emergency law: the ‘conferral principle’ limitation and the ways to expand executive powers in the EU response to the crisis (Pringle,ESMA,BPP,OMT) – the existence of legal certainty failures in that response: unpredictable and disjointed legislation and adjudication – arguments blurring legal certainty as the standard of review for EU emergency law: conditionality, international law and indirect legislation – the self-restraint attitude of the European Court of Justice and the risks of leaving litigation under the sole remit of national courts: normalising emergency powers and EU law autonomy at stake

scholarly journals Interference with Freedom of Expression

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriela Nemţoi ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Social Issues ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
European Court ◽  
Margin Of Appreciation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Case Basis

Established as a personal right, the right to free speech implies obligations and duties, which may generate possible restrictions. Freedom of expression works correctly in a legal framework when it comes to a legitimate aim in a state law. Article 10, paragraph 2, of the Convention explains the conditions under which the right to freedom of expression is justified by the need to protect certain public interests (such as those relating to national security, the territorial space of the state, public order, the prevention of crimes, the protection of health and social morals, the guarantee of authority and the impartiality of the judiciary) but also to protect certain private interests, such as reputation and the rights of others. persons or the need to prevent the publication of secret information. This paragraph basically authorizes states to take certain measures to protect those interests, which materialize through rules and normative rules of the right to conscience, opinion and freedom of expression States enjoy a margin of appreciation for establishing the need for such reactions in a state governed by the rule of law, but in the end it is also up to the European Court of Human Rights to rule on the compatibility of interference with the provisions of the Convention, assessing on a case-by-case basis if the interference arises as a result of the urgent social issues and whether it is fair.

scholarly journals Governing Knowledge: Intellectual Property Management for Development and the Public Interest

2015 ◽  
Vol 66 ◽  
pp. 69-88
Author(s):  
Leonardo Burlamaqui
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Public Domain ◽  
Policy Recommendations ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
Intellectual Property Management ◽  
Analytical Perspective ◽  
The Right

The core point of this paper is the hypothesis that in the field of intellectual property rights and regulations, the last three decades witnessed a big change. The boundaries of private (or corporate) interests have been hyper-expanded while the public domain has significantly contracted. It tries to show that this is detrimental to innovation diffusion and productivity growth. The paper develops the argument theoretically, fleshes it out with some empirical evidence and provides a few policy recommendations on how to redesign the frontiers between public and private spaces in order to produce a more democratic and development-oriented institutional landscape. The proposed analytical perspective developed here, “Knowledge Governance”, aims to provide a framework within which, in the field of knowledge creation and diffusion, the dividing line between private interests and the public domain ought to be redrawn. The paper’s key goal is to provide reasoning for a set of rules, regulatory redesign and institutional coordination that would favor the commitment to distribute (disseminate) over the right to exclude.Keywords: knowledge management, intellectual property, patent, public, interest, public sector, private sector, socioeconomic developmen

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.

Headwind from Europe: The New Position of the German Courts on Personality Rights after the Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 527-537 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corinna Coors
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
State Laws ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The U.S

In Germany, as in the U.S., the relationship between protection of privacy and freedom of expression has been subject of many decisions. In the U.S. a right of privacy was famously conjured out of common law precedents by Warren and Brandeis. Over the course of a century, it developed into a right of publicity, which gave celebrities the power to prevent the commercial use of their names, endorsements, images, voices, and other attributes of personality by unauthorized third parties. In defining such a right, much attention has been focused on separating what is commercially unacceptable from what is desirable free speech under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. It has also been important to settle the duration of such rights. Publicity rights as a commercial value of a person's identity are therefore well established in the U.S., although state laws vary widely as to the extent of protection. In Germany, due to the constitutional background of the personality right, the balance between public and private interests still operates differently. After the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in 2004 convicted the German Federal Republic of violating the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights Fundamental Freedoms, the German Federal Court (Bundesgerichtshof—BGH) took the opportunity to think over its previous position about image rights. Three judgments were examined by the German Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht—BVerfG) and one of them was reversed.

scholarly journals The Concept and Essence of Administrative and Legal Protection of Tax Relations

2019 ◽  
Vol 74 (3) ◽  
pp. 30-34
Author(s):  
K. S. Rohozinnikova
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Protection Measures ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
Essential Components ◽  
Protected Object ◽  
Legal Security

The concept and essence of administrative and legal protection of tax relations have been considered. It has been emphasized that the study of general theoretical ideas about the correlation between the concepts of legal security and legal protection will contribute to solving the tasks of the research. The provisions on the correlation of legal security and legal protection in the whole and as a part have been supported. The author has established peculiarities of administrative and legal protection compared with other types of legal protection of public relations: such activity is carried out by public administration agencies through administrative and legal means, including coercive ones. The essential components of administrative and legal protection, which should form the basis of its definition, include: prevention of negative phenomena; detection of possible violations; overcoming harmful consequences (restoration of violated rights); maintaining stable legal relations; prosecuting persons who encroach on the protected object. The author has emphasized on the peculiarities of the purpose of using the means of administrative and legal protection of tax relations – protection of public interests in the field of taxation, as an organic and balanced combination of public and private interests, the satisfaction of which contributes to the sustainable development of society. It has been found out that the content of administrative protection of a particular object is revealed through its means and measures. The analysis of sectoral studies has allowed to establish the following feature of administrative and legal protection measures: they are carried out by means of service nature, the list of which differs depending on the object of administrative legal protection, control and supervision, as well as by applying measures of administrative coercion. The need for a two-vector consideration of administrative and legal protection means has been emphasized: their impact is directed both on the taxpayer and on the controlling agencies (revenue and fees agencies).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document