scholarly journals Ensuring Good Faith in Arbitration Proceedings

2018 ◽  
pp. 82-89
Author(s):  
P. A. Ilyichev
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Arbitration Procedure ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Set Up ◽  
The Right ◽  
Scientific Doctrine

This article is devoted to some aspects of ensuring good faith in arbitration proceedings in civil cases within the framework of the arbitration procedure in terms of securing rights and legitimate interests of third parties who are not parties to arbitration with due regard to the reform of the arbitration courts law. The article analyzes the problem that takes place in law enforcement practice when parties involved in civil transactions to the detriment of rights and legally protected interests of third parties resort to arbitration proceedings and confirm an artificially created debt arising from a non-existing contractual obligation. On the basis of the scientific doctrine and jurisprudence analysis and with due regard to legal stances of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the author proposes a set of measures aimed at preventing abuse of the right to arbitration proceedings, the content of which is reduced to the introduction of the principle of good faith directly into the norms of arbitration procedure legislation and an obligatory notarial form of the arbitration agreement when the cases are considered by arbitral tribunals set up by the parties to consider a dispute in question.

scholarly journals On Issue of Civil and Legal Liability of the Insolvency Officer for Actions (Inaction) of Third Parties in a Bankruptcy Case

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Igor Staritsyn
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Liability ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Bankruptcy Law ◽  
District Courts ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Illegal Behavior ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right

Considering the right of the insolvency officer to involve other persons, including employees of the debtor, to ensure his powers, the article examines the possibility of bringing the officer to civil and legal liability in the form of recovering damages for actions (inaction) of such persons. It summarizes and analyzes the judicial practice at the level of the Arbitration District Courts and the Judicial Panel on Economic Disputes of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. A conclusion is made of admissibility in certain cases of bringing the insolvency officer to civil and legal liability for the actions of the persons involved by him. The illegal behavior and the fault of the insolvency officer can be expressed in improper control over the actions (inactions) of third parties, in selecting an incompetent person. The article offers to regulate at the legislative level the issue of the possibility of bringing the insolvency officer to liability for actions of other persons, by including such rules in the Bankruptcy Law.

TAJEMNICA DZIENNIKARSKA I ZASADY ZWALNIANIA Z NIEJ

2021 ◽  
pp. 198-213
Author(s):  
Lech Jaworski
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Editorial Office ◽  
Personal Rights ◽  
The Press ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
Publishing Houses ◽  
Rights And Interests ◽  
The Right

Journalistic secrecy is professional. In the light of Article 15 of the Press Law (Pr.L.) the journalist is obliged to keep secret the identity of his informants and the authors of the press material, the mail to the editorial office or other material of this nature, if they deserve the right to remain anonymmous. This obligation also applies to other persons employed in editorial offices, press publishing houses and other press organizational units. In addition, it covers any information, the disclosure of which could violate the legitimate interests of third parties. This corresponds to the content of Article 12 § 1 (2) Pr.L., according to which a journalist is obliged to protect the personal rights and interests of informants acting in good faith and other people who trust him or her. Breaking journalistic secrecy is a crime prosecuted ex officio. However, in certain situations journalistic secrecy is excluded (Article 16 Pr.L. and Article 180 of the Code of Criminal Procedure).

scholarly journals Recovery of Damages from the Head of an Economic Entity: Legislation of the Russian Federation and Law Enforcement Practice

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 ◽  
pp. 10003
Author(s):  
Y.A. Dorofeeva ◽  
M.N. Zubkova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Legal Entity ◽  
Historical Method ◽  
Economic Entity ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Legal Entities

A legal entity as a union recognized in law and absent as an independent entity outside the law, exists and carries out its activities through the governing bodies whose composition and competence are always predetermined by the norms of positive law. Undoubtedly, the rights of the governing bodies of a legal entity, as well as the duties of the head of the organization, must be strictly predetermined and have limits defined by law. Failure of this rule would mean the possibility of abuse of the right by the governing bodies of legal entities, their release from the obligation to lead the organization in good faith and reasonably, evasion from the fulfillment of obligations assumed by the legal entity through the sole executive body or another governing body of the organization. In order to prevent harm to the organization and third parties, the governing bodies of the legal entity, the legislator set certain rules for the activities of the governing bodies of the legal entity, as well as the grounds for applying measures of responsibility for violating such rules. The responsibility of the head includes the recovery of damages caused by his fault to a legal entity. The purpose of the study is to analyze the grounds and conditions for recovery of damages caused by the head of the organization in the legislation of the Russian Federation and arbitration practice. The objectives of the study are to determine the grounds for liability of the head of a legal entity in the form of damages, show the genesis of the formation of Russian legislation and the practice of its use by courts on recovering losses of a legal entity from the head of an organization, identify criteria for determining the presence of both good faith and reasonableness in the behavior of managers of legal entities, brought to responsibility in the form of the obligation to pay damages to the organization they lead. In carrying out the study, such methods were used as: general scientific - analysis, synthesis, comparison, generalization, historical method; private-scientific: formal-legal, comparative-legal, allowing to consider the issues of bringing to responsibility in the form of recovery of damages of the head of a legal entity; Formal legal method for determining the content of abstract categories - reasonableness, good faith, permissible behavior, method of system-structural analysis - to study the possibility of applying damages as a form of responsibility for the guilty behavior of a special entity - the head of a legal entity The result of the study is the establishment of the grounds and conditions for applying to the head (former head) of a legal entity responsibility in the form of recovery of damages caused to the organization managed by it, in the legislation of the Russian Federation and judicial practice. The findings and results of the study can be used for further research and as educational material, in legislative work and in law enforcement practice.

scholarly journals Deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities: regulatory issues and law enforcement practice

2021 ◽  
Vol 234 (11) ◽  
pp. 16-24
Author(s):  
SERGEY A. PICHUGIN ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Scientific Methods ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Domestic Legislation ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right

The article is devoted to various aspects of the regulation and execution of punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities. The subject of the article is the norms of the current domestic legislation, data from official statistics of the Judicial Department at the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia, as well as law enforcement practice on the topic under consideration. The purpose of the article is to analyze the normative regulation and practice of applying punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities. The methodological basis of the research is represented by a set of general and specific scientific methods. The work used methods such as analysis, synthesis, formal legal, statistical. As a result of the study, proposals were formulated to amend the current legislation in terms of improving preventive work with persons sentenced to punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities. Conclusions are made about the essence, features of legal regulation and law enforcement practice of the considered type of punishment in modern conditions, about the need to increase the effectiveness of preventive activities in relation to persons sentenced to punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to engage in activities related to driving a vehicle. Key words: deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities, punishment, penal inspectorates, the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, convict, deprivation of the right to engage in activities related to driving.

scholarly journals A New Obligation to Submit Copies of Statements of Claims to Other Parties to a Procedure: The Procedure Theory and the Application Practice

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 34-35
Author(s):  
Vera P. Kudryavtseva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Decision To Leave ◽  
Critical View ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Additional Costs ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
New Interpretation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Two Sides

The article reveals the practice of interpretation of the new obligation to send a statement of claim and other documents before filing a claim in court. The new version of article 132 of the CPC has given rise to an interpretation that prevents the plaintiffs from exercising their right to appeal to the court. The problem of access to the court has two sides-financial and procedural. The financial side puts the burden on the plaintiff to bear additional costs before the process occurs. The procedural side complicates the solution of the problem, since it does not directly fix the possibility to appeal the judge’s decision to leave the application without movement. A critical view of the interpretation of the text based on the principles of civil procedure is given. A new interpretation cannot be left to the court discretion. The absence of evidence of sending the claim to other participants cannot be considered as an abuse of the right. It is proposed to proceed from the principle of good faith of the plaintiff when initiating a civil case. The necessity to fix the presumption of sending the documents specified in the law to facilitate access to the court is justified. It is proposed to unify the interpretation of the new obligation by adopting A resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals Implementation of the Doctrine of Good Faith (Bona Fides) in Corporate Legal Relations

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (12) ◽  
pp. 70-80
Author(s):  
Yu. V. Brisov
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Corporate Ethics ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

Good faith (bona fides) is presented in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation as a general principle and presumption. In resolving corporate disputes, the courts are governed by general principles of good faith. However, corporate relations have a specificity due to, inter alia, the variety of corporate forms. It can be assumed that the application of good faith provisions should also vary taking into account the characteristics of corporate patterns, the types and forms of corporate relations, subjective internal corporate circumstances. Common law countries have developed a system of good faith elements and special tests to apply the required requirement of good faith according to the context. A special place is given to fiduciary relations as a product of bona fides. The author has carried out a comparative analysis of the provisions of the Plenums of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the law enforcement practice of Germany, the USA, Great Britain and Canada on the issues of good faith in the consideration of corporate disputes. Special attention is paid to the interrelation between corporate ethics and law. Examining a number of key cases from the law-enforcement practice of the courts of the Anglo-American system of law, the author substantiates the possibility of applying special tests, namely, objective and subjective good faith tests, to regulate matters related to the application of the rules of good faith from the Civil Code and special laws in dealing with corporate disputes. Special attention is paid to the role of courts and permissible discretion in the formation of standards of enforcement of blanket norms and general principles of law in corporate relations.

scholarly journals Court’s modification of category of gravity of the committed offence and implementation of compulsory measures set by the Article 92 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation: problems of theory, legislative regulation, and law enforcement

2021 ◽  
pp. 59-84
Author(s):  
Kirill Igorevich Nagornov
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Closed Type ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Scientific Doctrine

Leaning on the analysis of the provisions of current legislation, clarification of the supreme judicial authority, scientific doctrine, case law materials and statistics, this article explores the implementation of compulsory measures set by the Article 92 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, after court’s modification of the category of gravity of the committed offence in accordance with the Part 6 of the Article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The goal of this research lies in assessment from the perspective of the theory of criminal law of such specific procedure for implementation of disciplinary compulsory measures and herding to closed-type special institution, as well as identification of possible flaws and contradictions that may cause problems and ambiguous decisions in law enforcement practice. Attention is given to the existing contradictions between the provisions of criminal law and criminal procedure law, explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, as well as legislative gaps and problems emerging in law enforcement practice in the context of provision set by the Article 92 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in accordance with the Part 6 of Article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Taking into account the sequence, grounds and conditions established by the legislator in the Part 6 of the Article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for the use of the latter, the conclusion is made on impossibility to apply compulsory educational measures in line with this norm. The article also substantiates the position infeasibility of preliminary imposition of penalty (de lege ferenda) on release of such with implementation of compulsory measures set by Part 1 and 2 of the Article 92 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The author also offers to supplement and rectify certain provisions of the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 10 of May 15, 2018.

ARTICLE-BY-ARTICLE COMMENTARY TO THE ARBITRATION PROCEDURE CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION (CHAPTER 28.1)

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 134-179
Author(s):  
E.S. RAZDYAKONOV ◽  
I.N. TARASOV
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Access To Information ◽  
Time Limits ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Legal Literature ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Arbitration Procedure ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Interim Measures

This article is the author’s text of the article-by-article commentary to the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, which has not been previously published in the legal literature. It takes into account the latest changes in procedural legislation, including on the delimitation of jurisdiction over corporate disputes between arbitration courts and courts of general jurisdiction, conciliation in corporate disputes and their arbitrability, notifying participants in a corporate dispute about litigation in such a dispute and determining the procedural status of participants in a corporate dispute. The authors from the standpoint of the modern doctrine of the civil law process interpret the articles of Chapter 28.1 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, which regulate the consideration of cases by arbitration courts on corporate disputes. The content of the commented norms is revealed in their relationship with other norms of the APC RF, provisions of other federal laws and current legal positions of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The allocation by the legislator of the procedure for considering corporate disputes in a separate chapter of the APC of the Russian Federation is due to the nature of the disputed material legal relations and the task of considering such cases using procedural features that make it possible to better ensure the observance and protection of the rights and legitimate interests of participants in a corporate dispute. These procedural features are established by the legislator in terms of determining the competence of arbitration courts to consider corporate disputes, requirements for a statement of claim (statement) in a corporate dispute, providing access to information about a corporate dispute, conciliation in a corporate dispute, application of interim measures, time limits for performing certain procedural actions, including time limits for appealing judicial acts, composition of court costs, grounds for imposition and amounts of court fines. These features are disclosed by the authors during commenting on the relevant provisions of the law.

Joint bankruptcy of spouses: theory and practice issues

2021 ◽  
pp. 271-280
Author(s):  
Irina E. Belova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right

We research the issue of the current law enforcement practice of considering cases of joint bankruptcy of spouses in the framework of insolvency procedures of individuals. We emphasize that at the legislative level, joint bankruptcy of spouses and multiple persons on the debtor’s side is not provided for. Initially, this resulted in a lack of courts’ uniform approach, which has become a subject of discussion in the scientific literature. In this context, we pay attention to the importance of adoption by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of position on the combining admissibility of spouses’ banknote cases. In turn, the permissibility of combining cases did not resolve the issue of possibility of accepting a joint bankruptcy application, which again led to discrepancies in judicial practice. Special attention is paid to the admissibility of combining cases, which is the right of the court, and not its duty. We note that the arbitration courts, when solving this issue, study such circumstances as the subject composition of the persons participating in the cases of debtors, the volume and nature of prop-erty that is part of the bankruptcy estate of each debtor’s property, the per-formance of duties of financial manager by the same person. Despite the de-veloping judicial practice of joint bankruptcy of spouses, justified by the ex-planations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, we believe that it expedient and necessary to establish the grounds, procedure and conditions for joint bankruptcy of individuals who are spouses at the legislative level.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document