scholarly journals COURT’S DEFENSE OF PERSON’S RIGHTS IN A SPHERE OF CITY PLANNING BY PUBLIC ASSOCIATIONS: DEFINITION OF A PROBLEM

2021 ◽  
pp. 56-67
Author(s):  
K.I. Apanasenko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
City Planning ◽  
Public Organizations ◽  
Town Planning ◽  
Legal Action ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
Potential Possibility ◽  
The Right ◽  
Legal Entities

Unauthorized buildings are enough common problem of city planning in Ukraine. There is very popular practice to receive permissive documents after the beginning of building works and before commissioning. Therefore, effectiveness of activity of the Ukrainian State Architectural Building Service is not high. As a result, last decade some citizens and public organizations take part in struggle with city planning violations. Therefore, an investigation of a normative base of an appropriate activity of public organizations and court’s practice in this sphere is an actual task in purpose of an adoption of some legislative decisions. The author had identified position of Supreme Court on duty to application a rule about legal interest of a plaintiff. Only fact of an unauthorized building is not enough for its stopping on claims of not interested persons. The cessation of a town planning violation is possible only in condition of risk for rights and legal interests of plaintiffs (citizens and / or legal entities) or on actions of authorized state organs. The number of decisions of Supreme Court decided in favor of plaintiffs in cases on the claims of citizens and public organizations regarding unauthorized buildings of apartment buildings and other capital objects of town planning is small enough. Actual procedural legislation and normative legal acts which define a status of public organizations don’t provide its right to take legal action for a defense of rights and interests of legal entities and persons, territorial communities, public interests. Nowadays the question of provision public organizations by procedural interest in appropriate categories of disputes in the legislation kept up. Procedural interest of public organizations, its legal interest directly links to the question of court’s defense of public interests, with an institute of actio popularis. Because such organizations have to defend only public, not personal interest in accordance to its statutory object. It is important to understand that an interest for the stopping of illegal building cannot be personalize as an interest of any citizen. Therefore, it is an actual task to develop theoretical ideas about court’s defense of public interest. Nowadays Ukraine accepted the possibility of the defense of public interests only in spheres of consumer’s rights and ecological disputes. The legal public interest in other spheres of public life is not legitimize for the court’s defense. The author has made a conclusion about potential possibility and necessity of legislative recognizing of the right of public organizations to take legal action for the defense of rights of its members in the sphere of unauthorized buildings.

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.

Legal Characteristics of a Servitude in the Public Interest

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 937-939
Author(s):  
Renato Vrenčur ◽  
Michael Knaus ◽  
Matjaž Tratnik
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Economic Activity ◽  
The State ◽  
Public Infrastructure ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
The Public ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Set Up ◽  
The Right ◽  
Limited Duration

Servitudes (easements) traditionally include the right to use foreign property. Specific types of servitudes are servitudes in the public interest. These are set up either in favour of the state, municipalities or operators of utilities. These servitudes are subject to some specific rules. For example, servitude in the public interest is established to carry out an undertaking for the operation of economic activity, i.e. to pursue public interests. It is needed for the duration of the use of public infrastructure; therefore, Article 227 of SPZ, under which a servitude may only be established for a limited duration of not more than thirty years, is not suitable for these servitudes. Furthermore, these servitudes are not independently transferable; they are transferred together with the right to operate economic public infrastructure. The authors discuss in particular the specific legal nature of a servitude in the public interest.

scholarly journals Public Interest and Privacy: the Right to Privacy in the Cover-age of Events by the Mass Media

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (4.38) ◽  
pp. 239
Author(s):  
Elena Anatolyevna Kirillova ◽  
Varvara Vladimirovna Bogdan ◽  
Elena Stepanovna Ustinovich ◽  
Yuliya Olegovna Pronina ◽  
Olga Aleksandrovna Kovaleva ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mass Media ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Right To Privacy ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
Social Tasks ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
The Mass Media ◽  
Observation Method ◽  
The Right

The article deals with the problems related to the balance between private and public interests when covering events by the mass media. One of the most important social tasks is coordinating various interests, reaching a compromise, and ensuring social harmony and partnership. The purpose of the present study consists in analyzing the right to privacy when covering events by the mass media and identifying specifics of private and public interests. The research is based on the observation method that allowed obtaining a specific factual material. Monitoring was carried out according to the developed plan involving the allocation of specific monitoring objects and stages. The study offers the authors’ definitions of private and public interests, highlights the main features of public interest, as well as identifies the distinctive features of private and public interests. On the basis of the conducted analysis it is proposed to introduce the Concept of privacy (the right to be left alone), excluding cases where the right to privacy can be violated and where the information related to the privacy of a person can be disseminated without the consent of the person. This proposal is practical in nature and will allow the mass media to specificate the notion of the right to privacy. 

scholarly journals CITY-PLANNING ASPECTS OF TRAFFIC ARRANGEMENT IN HISTORICAL PART OF TOMSK-CITY

2018 ◽  
pp. 128-139 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. I. Korenev ◽  
A. A. Burlutskii ◽  
U. Yu. Guseva
Keyword(s):  
Computer Simulation ◽  
Road Network ◽  
City Planning ◽  
Town Planning ◽  
Traffic Load ◽  
Design Work ◽  
Optimum Decision ◽  
Gradual Development ◽  
The Right ◽  
Planning Concepts

The paper presents the research results and design work on town-planning and traffic development in the right-bank Tomsk-city which covers the area from the river Ushaika entry to Kommunal'nyi bridge. The analysis of the planning concepts is given herein and new approaches are suggested to the traffic arrangement in this territory.  Computer simulation is used to analyze the variants of street and road network, and the suggested optimum decision provides a gradual development of this territory. As a result, the traffic load in the center of Tomsk-city will be reduced.

‘Using’ Crisis of Governance as an Opportunity for ‘Re-invention’: Why the Supreme Court of India Took To Hearing Public Interest Litigations—A Case Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 215-223
Author(s):  
Subrata Biswas
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Positive Role ◽  
Indian Politics ◽  
Supreme Court Of India ◽  
The People ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Right

What do the different State organs do when they face a crisis? Do the suffering institutions successfully re-invent themselves or is it that some other institution uses the crisis to find an ‘opportunity’ to re-invent itself? Can one’s crisis be another’s opportunity? This case-study analyses how the Supreme Court of India (hereinafter SCI) reinvented itself in a bid to further the cause of good governance in the country ever since emergency had been clamped on the nation towards the end of 1970s. Surely there has been a crisis of governance in India, caused by the pathetic performance of both the legislature and the executive. It has led to myriad problems in both social and political arenas. If left unaddressed, Indian people might have turned more violent than they already are and that could have perpetrated a failure of democracy in the country. But the SCI has successfully played a positive role in this regard. If the other institutions have failed the people, the Supreme Court has championed their cause. The world’s largest democracy stands saved until now. But is it wholly the judges’ heartfelt concern for the people that has prompted the Supreme Court to function in this fashion? Did anything go wrong during the emergency? Why is it that it has been more and more active ever since the emergency ended? And why is it that there has been an exponential growth in public interest litigations (hereinafter PILs) in the Supreme Court even though it cannot handle so many cases because of infrastructural paucities? Situating itself in the specific context of PILs entertained by the SCI and supporting it with the theoretical inputs of the so-called ‘principal-agent framework’, this essay argues that there has been a competition (i.e., between the court and the elected politicians) for ‘occupying’ more space in the domain of governance since the inception of the Constitution and it is only the Supreme Court that got the right ‘opportunity’ to achieve its objective in the wake of crisis in governance that became so visible in Indian politics ever since the fag-end of the 1970s. While the court tried other instruments earlier in its game plan vis-a-vis the elected politicians, the crisis situation since the end of the 1970s made it ‘invent’ a new tool in the form of PILs capable of safeguarding the interests of the people and insulating them against the mindless functioning of multiple state agencies. But how far can the SCI (hereinafter SCI) proceed with this new tool? Is there a risk of ‘overusing’ it? Does the court not have its own limitations in this regard, too? What should the Supreme Court do in order to avert a fresh ‘crisis’?

scholarly journals Crookes v. Newton: The Supreme Court of Canada Brings Libel Law into the Internet Age

2012 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 205
Author(s):  
Iris Fischer ◽  
Adam Lazier
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Internet Age ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Right ◽  
Defamation Law

After paying little attention to defamation law for decades, in the last few years the Supreme Court of Canada has begun to reshape the field. In what has been described as the “constitutionalization” of defamation law, the Court has recently recognized that the common law was out of step with the right to freedom of expression guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This process began in 2008 with the Court’s decision in WIC Radio v. Simpson, which clarified and expanded the scope of the fair comment defence. The Court went further the following year with Grant v. Torstar Corp, which recognized an entirely new defence of responsible communication on matters of public interest.

scholarly journals CONFLICT OF NORM ANTARA PENCABUTAN HAK DAN PENITIPAN GANTI KERUGIAN DI PENGADILAN DALAM PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA PENGADAAN TANAH UNTUK PEMBANGUNAN

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 57
Author(s):  
M. Hamidi Masykur ◽  
Harinanto Sugiono
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Land Rights ◽  
The Other ◽  
District Court ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
The Public ◽  
Presidential Decree ◽  
The Law

Article 18 of Law No. 5 of 1960 concerning Basic Rules of Agrarian states that “For the public interest, including the national and State interest also the peoples interest, land rights may be revoked with reasonable compensation in accordance to the procedure provided by law.” The phrase of “revoked” in the article can be widely interpreted both in terms of the procedure as well as the authority. A year after the enactment of Law No. 5 of 1960, Law No. 20 of 1961 concerning Revocation of Land Rights and Properties on Land was enacted with the purpose to implement Article 18 of Law No. 5 of 1960. According to Law No. 20 of 1961, revocation of land rights for the public interests can be exercised through Presidential Decree. It means that there is no opportunity for the lands owner to file an objection against the revocation. On the other side, the enactment of Law No. 2 of 2012 concerning Land Procurement for Development in which Article 40 of the Law provides the custody mechanism for compensation to the District Court when the lands owner refuse to accept the compensation. The procedure has been confi  rmed by Supreme Court, which enacted Supreme Court Regulation No. 3 of 2016 concerning the Procedure for Submitting Objection and Compensation Custody to the District Court in Land Procurement for Public Interests. This situation shows confl  ict of norms between Law No. 20 of 1961 which is never declared not applicable, and then Law No. 2 of 2012 was enacted as new law in the same field of regulation.

scholarly journals Reframing public interest in the implementation of large urban projects in Serbia: The case of Belgrade Waterfront Project

2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kseniјa Lalovic ◽  
Uros Radosavljevic ◽  
Zoran Djukanovic
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
City Planning ◽  
City Government ◽  
Public Officials ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
Planning Models ◽  
Planning Experts

Entrepreneurial urban governments around the world use large-scale projects for promoting cities as a place for enhanced quality of life and attracting investment from an international level. However, large urban projects frequently challenge democratic planning and public interest, and break up conventional city planning models. We argue that the changed city government?s entrepreneurial role calls for reframing the public interest, taking into consideration both global private interests and sustainable impacts and benefits for varieties of local public interests. The paper presents the case of Belgrade Waterfront Project. Results show an efficient entrepreneurial direction of the Serbian national government, contrary to the worldwide experiences where urban governments take the lead. Still, it is questionable whether the outcomes will be just and fair, especially when it comes to "winners" and "losers". We place equity at the top of agenda for public officials and planners in the implementation of large-scale projects. Therefore, we believe there are varieties of public interests on various spatial levels, defined by politicians, explored by planning experts?, and accepted by the citizens for obtaining broader social support.

scholarly journals OPPORTUNITY LOST: THE SUPREME COURT MISSES A HISTORIC CHANCE TO CONSIDER QUESTION OF PUBLIC INTEREST STANDING FOR ANIMAL INTERESTS

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Sankoff
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Present Article ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Judicial Intervention ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Court Of Appeal ◽  
Lost Opportunity

The Supreme Court of Canada recently denied leave to appeal in Reece v. Edmonton (City), a 2-1 decision of the Alberta Court of Appeal, which focused on the right of private parties to seek judicial intervention on behalf of animals. In this article, the author examines the implications of this "lost opportunity" to develop an important area of law relating to public interest standing, explores the important questions that were at stake in the appeal, and suggests why the Supreme Court should have decided otherwise.La Cour suprême du Canada a récemment rejeté la demande d’autorisation d’appel de l’affaire Reece v. Edmonton (Ville), – une décision (2 contre 1) de la Cour d’appel de l’Alberta – qui portait sur le droit de simples individus de demander une intervention judiciaire au nom des animaux. Dans le présent article, l’auteur examine les conséquences de cette [TRADUCTION] « occasion ratée » de développer un important domaine du droit relatif à l’intérêt public, et de traiter les questions sérieuses qui étaient soulevées dans l’appel; il tente d’expliquer pourquoi la Cour suprême aurait dû rendre une décision différente.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document