scholarly journals Compensation of property damage caused to non-participants in criminal procedure in order of rehabilitation

Author(s):  
V. V. Muryleva-Kazak

The article discusses the issue of the legal nature of the right to compensate harm, the effectiveness of usage of the criminal procedure mechanism for its protection and the reasonableness of the inclusion of relevant in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.Based on the analysis of judicial practice, it is concluded that the courts have difficulties in determining the appropriate way to protect the right to compensate harm caused in the course of criminal proceedings and the delineation of competence between arbitration courts and courts of general jurisdiction, which leads to a violation of the applicants’ right to access to justice and reduces the effectiveness of judicial protection.In addition, it is concluded that the criminal procedure form is not adapted to the consideration of civil disputes on compensation for harm, the author names the impossibility of collecting lost profits as one of the factors that reduce the effectiveness of the use of the criminal procedural mechanism for protecting property rights.Based on the interpretation of the criminal procedure rules provided in the article, the author concludes that legal entities have an opportunity to use criminal procedure remedies for violated property rights in more cases than individuals, which violates the principle of equality before the law and the court. The article provides ways to solve the identified problems.

Author(s):  
Olga Aivazova ◽  
Galina Vardanyan ◽  
Irina Smirnova

The article discusses some aspects of proving in cases of crimes against legal entities. The criminalistic description of the victim represented by a legal entity determines specific details of applying criminalistic and criminal procedure measures aimed at the identification, investigation, detection and prevention of such crimes. Under the current Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, one of the elements of ordering criminal proceedings is the protection of rights and legal interests of organizations that became victims of crimes. Part 1 of Art. 42 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation details this guideline for the first time by giving legal entities, viewed as independent subjects of criminal procedure legal relations, the right to be recognized as victims of criminal actions if the crime inflicted damage on their property or business reputation. Nevertheless, the imperfections in the regulation of legal entities’ participation in criminal proceeding, and the insufficient attention to the specifics of realizing their rights and legal interests in comparison with the physical persons of a similar procedural status give rise to numerous problems. The complex of such problems has a negative impact on the effectiveness of investigating this category of crimes and, as a consequence, on the ability of criminal proceedings to produce the intended result. The literal interpretation of Part 1, Art. 42 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation points out that the consequences of such crimes must include the infliction of two types of damage simultaneously — «to property and to business reputation», which can hardly be considered a good de­finition from the standpoint of juridical technique. Quite naturally, the investigation and court practice shows that law enforcers, while collecting proof on the character and size of damage inflicted on legal entities as a result of a crime, usually limit themselves to proving material damage, and even this damage is not proven in full (the common omission being losses of expected income). As for the damage inflicted on business reputation of a legal entity, its establishment during criminal proceedings is still problematic and, in practice, there is usually a gap in proving it. The authors point out that incomplete character of evidentiary information regarding the infliction of damage on the business reputation of legal entities is inadmissible and present their recommendations for resolving this problem, including the use of specialist knowledge and the improvements in the tactics of specific investigatory actions aimed at obtaining criminalistically relevant information on the case.


Author(s):  
Nadiia Drozdovych

The article is devoted to the study of procedural analogy place in the system of criminal proceedings principles in connection with the statutory provisions of Part 6 of Art. 9 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. The historical aspect of the analogy institution normative consolidation in the domestic criminal process is given, which indicates that the institution of analogy in the norms of the Criminal Procedure Code has not been directly enshrined since the 1920s. At the same time, the science justified its necessity and admissibility in the criminal process; scientific results in this area are also given in the article. The existence of two types of analogy is stated: “analogies of right” and “analogies of law”, in connection with which the doctrinal provisions on the applicability of any of them in the modern criminal process are analyzed. The article also provides examples to use the institution of analogy in the judicial practice of the court of cassation. It has been established that despite the legislative technique, the doctrinal provisions and judicial practice state the admissibility of two types of analogy in the domestic criminal process. In this regard, the use of the term “procedural analogy” is justified as the most correct and such, which in its content covers the notion “analogy of the right” and the "analogy of the law". Since the legal norms on procedural analogy are placed within the framework of CPC article on the principle of legality, its relationship with the procedural analogy is determined. To this end, doctrinal statements about the concept of principles of criminal proceedings, author's positions on their classification as well as the criteria for their separate definition are given. Based on the above material, it was concluded that the procedural analogy is not an independent principle of criminal proceedings. The fact that the provisions of Part 6 of Art. 9 of the Criminal Procedure Code placed in the content of the principle of legality, suggests that the procedural analogy is one of the ways to achieve and implement this principle. Key words: analogy of law, analogy of right, procedural analogy, general principles of criminal proceedings.


Author(s):  
Tatiana Topilina

This article analyzes the problems of implementation of the right of access to justice for consideration of the criminal procedure dispute in accordance with the Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. The author carefully examines the legislation of the countries of post-Soviet space on filing a complaint against actions (omissions), as well as decisions of the prosecuting agency in pretrial proceedings. The subject of this research is the norms of the Russian and foreign legislation that regulate the right of access to justice in criminal proceedings. The object is the legal relations arising in the context of implementation of the right of access to justice. The article employs the universal systemic method of cognition; comparative-legal, formal-legal, and statistical methods; as well as logical analysis of the normative legal acts. It is indicated that restriction of the access to justice for consideration of the criminal procedure dispute in accordance with the Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation is also established by the practice developed in law enforcement for evaluation of the complaint prior to its consideration involving  the parties with the possibility of making a decision on whether to remit or reject the complaint in the absence of legislatively specified grounds, which directly affects the number of addressed complaints. The conclusion is made on the need to specify the grounds for remitting the complaint of an applicant filed in accordance with the Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, for the purpose of excluding the possibility of decision made by the court that is not based on the law on remitting or rejecting the complaint for consideration (the Article 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation).


Author(s):  
E.V. Bolshakov ◽  
◽  
I.D. Nazarov ◽  

The subject of the research within the framework of the article is the criminal procedure institute for the detention of a person on suspicion of committing a crime. The legal nature of this institution is analyzed, and comments are given on the normative legal acts and judicial practice regulating the issues of detention. The theoretical basis of the research is based on the publications of the last two decades on this problem, in particular, reflecting the discussion of the process scientists S. A. Shafer, S. B. Rossinsky and A. A. Tarasov, the subject of which was the issue of the legal nature of a suspect detention in a criminal case. In the paper, the authors ask the following questions: What is the detention of a person on suspicion of committing a crime in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation? From what moment does the detained person acquire the status of a suspect? Is it possible to detain a person before initiating a criminal case? The study concludes that a person acquires the actual status of a suspect from the moment of direct detention, that is, before documenting this status and, as a result, before initiating a criminal case. Amendments to the articles of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation are proposed, and the authors` versions of the definitions of the concepts «detention of a suspect», «the moment of actual detention» and «pre-trial proceedings» are given.


2019 ◽  
pp. 137-144
Author(s):  
Serhii Krushynskyi

The article is devoted to the analysis of some problematic questions related to the duty of proving of civil suit in criminal proceedings in Ukraine. In the criminal procedure doctrine there is no unanimous opinion of which subjects are required to engage into proving activities aimed at detection of civil suit circumstances in criminal proceedings. Concepts «duty of proving» and «burden of proving» are delineated by author. The position that the burden of proving is determined by the interests of participants in criminal proceedings was supported. The content of the burden of proving of civil suit in criminal proceedings covers the need to representation of evidence to justify (or refute) the amount of property damage, the depth of the suffering, and the amount of property compensation for non-pecuniary damage. The material and procedural interest of the civil plaintiff and the civil defendant in the outcome of the criminal proceedings encourages them to take an active part in the criminal procedural proving, in particular by representation of evidence available to them. The publicity (officiality) of criminal proceedings causes differences in the procedure for proving the grounds and size of a civil suit in criminal proceedings compared to civil proceedings. It is concluded that the duty of proving of civil suit circumstances lies on the prosecution party (investigator, prosecutor). The civil plaintiff, the civil defendant, their representatives are complete subjects of proving, but their activity in proving is a right, but not a duty. For the successful performance of their procedural functions, the defense of their legitimate interests, these persons are empowered to represent evidence, to participate in their research. So, they are given the opportunity to contribute to the correct resolution of criminal proceedings, in particular in the civil suit part. The subjects involved in the criminal proceedings who have a duty of proving should provide a possibility of realization of the right to represent evidence by other participants in the process.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (4(106)) ◽  
pp. 183-191
Author(s):  
Ю. М. Щавинська

The relevance of the article is that the property rights of citizens and businesses are not only the basis of Ukraine's economy - they are based on family relations, they are also the material basis of local governments and state organizations, institutions and enterprises. In other words, without their proper registration and protection, it is impossible to ensure any other sphere of public life. In Ukraine, some attention is paid to the legislative definition of property rights and the problem of their state registration. And if with the first part of the outlined, in our opinion, a certain harmony is reached, then the issue of protection of property rights in today's conditions is acute. Its violations, in particular raids on enterprises and other violations of the property rights of individuals and legal entities, although decreased in number, but such facts have not remained in the past. The leading instrument of administrative legal protection of property rights is the institution of state registration of property rights, which in today's conditions is undergoing a process of further transformation and improvement in the effectiveness of protection of the rights of property rights. The artіcle reveals and descrіbes the legal nature of property rіghts and theіr state regіstratіon. Thіs іs done on the basіs of the theory of natural law, the theory of admіnіstratіve law, the theory of cіvіl law, as well as domestіc legіslatіon. Іt іs proved that the legal nature of the state regіstratіon of real rіghts to іmmovable property іs that іn іts іmplementatіon there are specіfіc admіnіstratіve and legal relatіons of a protectіve nature. It is concluded that the legal nature of state registration of property rights to property rights is that in its implementation there are classic administrative and legal protection relations, which involve applicants or their authorized persons, usually private legal entities, and public ( public) registrars as subjects of power. The content of these relations is: 1) the subjective right of the applicant to receive a kind of public protection in formal form (security document) and in essence - to use the entire public apparatus of protection and state coercion in his case in case of violation of registered property rights; 2) the administrative duty of a special subject of public administration (registrar) is a public obligation to carry out such registration. In turn, the registrar has the right to demand from the applicant provided by the current legislation confirmation of ownership of the property rights submitted for registration. Legal facts in the analyzed area of administrative and legal relations are the entry in the register of decisions on state registration, which directly lead to a change or termination of legal relations. A separate line in this area should be noted administrative-legal, administrative-procedural and economic-procedural legal relations that arise when appealing the decisions of state registrars to refuse registration (registration) of property rights to administrative or (and) judicial authorities.


2020 ◽  
pp. 62-67
Author(s):  
Kateryna Nekit

Problem setting. Today, the use of numerous sites is allowed only with the consent of the user agreements (Terms of Service) offered by them. Most often, users tick them, which is tantamount to signing such agreements, without even reading. However, it turns out that in most cases, user agreements, which are essentially agreements between users and providers, are aimed only at securing the interests of providers and in fact impose significant restrictions on users without granting them any rights other than the right to use the service. In addition, providers create them in such a way as not to draw the attention of users to the presence of the contract in this relationship. Such agreements are generally placed as hyperlinks at the bottom of the page or are created as a step that the user must agree to during registration. On this basis, the question of the need to strengthen the protection of users’ rights as a weaker party to the contract, by analogy with consumer protection, is increasingly raised. Moreover, the possibility of considering a user agreement as a kind of contract is widely discussed. Analysis of recent researches and publications. Given the novelty of such a phenomenon as user agreement, today there are not many studies devoted to them, especially in domestic science. Among foreign researchers of the legal nature and specifics of user agreements can be mentioned K. Cornelius, L. Belli and J. Venturini, T. Romm, P. Randolph, M. Radin, A. Savelyev, N. Vlasova. Thus, there is a lack of domestic research on the legal nature of user agreements, so there is an urgent need for research in this area. Target of research is to study the legal nature of the user agreement and analyze the possibility of it to become a ground for legal relationships, in particular, a ground for establishment of ownership to virtual property. Article’s main body. The article analyzes the possibility of considering user agreements as potential grounds for the emergence of ownership to virtual property. The judicial practice to protect the rights of users of accounts and European approaches to the protection of user rights are analyzed in the article. The research data, which give grounds to speak about violation of user rights by user agreements are given. In turn, this gives reason to question the possibility of considering the user agreement as a kind of contract. However, the analysis performed allows us to conclude that it is possible to consider the user agreement as a mixed contract, which can potentially serve as a ground for the emergence of virtual property rights. Conclusions and prospects for the development. Terms of Service agreements should be considered as mixed agreements that contain elements of several agreements. In particular, in the context of the emergence of virtual property rights from such agreements, elements of the Terms of Service agreement should be distinguished, which determine the legal consequences for the virtual property created within the online platforms. In the doctrine, the concept of virtual property as a kind of property right is already quite common today, and this kind of right may well arise from the contract, which in this case may be the Terms of Service agreement. If the Terms of Service agreement is recognized as the ground for the emergence of virtual property rights, it is necessary to provide in it how the balance of interests of platform developers and users in relation to virtual property will be determined. Obviously, all the features of the implementation and protection of virtual property rights, cases of its restriction will be specified in the contract.


2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Ольга Семыкина ◽  
Olga Semykina

The article deals with the legislative and doctrinal precondition of criminal liability of legal persons, which are accumulated a concept formed the basis of the judicial reform of 1864. The author studies the practice the first phase of the introduction in to the Russian criminal procedure enforcement of the measures applicable to legal persons for acts committed during preliminary investigation of crimes. In this context, the article lays emphasis on the norms of the Charter of criminal proceedings of 1864, which contain the procedural peculiarities of the application of such a measures to legal entities as closure, as well as monitors the judicial practice on the criminal liability of legal persons. The article gives a positive assessment of the approach of the legislator to the possibility of the implementation of remedial measures in criminal proceedings on such corruption crimes as crimes against property and income of the treasury. Given these positions, the author comes to the conclusion of the possibility of application of measures of criminal procedure liability of legal persons under preliminary investigation in criminal cases of crimes that infringe on budget forming industries.


2021 ◽  
Vol 66 ◽  
pp. 224-228
Author(s):  
A.-M.Y. Anheleniuk

The article considers the collection of evidence by the prosecution, because it is in this order that the evidence base of criminal proceedings is most often formed. Thus, the prosecutor, investigator (investigator) acting under Articles 36, 40, 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, as well as an employee of the operational unit pursuant to Article 41 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine on behalf of the investigator or prosecutor have the right to collect evidence. The purpose of the article is to study the affiliation of the subjects of evidence collection as part of the procedural form of the criminal process of Ukraine, taking into account the analysis of court decisions, namely the assessment of the evidence base as a basis for deciding on the merits of criminal proceedings. Cases of involvement of an improper subject in the pre-trial investigation, which are common and typical, are systematized. There are two types of improper subjects within the investigative (search) or procedural actions, namely the subject: 1) is not appointed in the manner prescribed by law, although according to current legislation according to the list of its powers may be appropriate; 2) does not have the authority under the law to make a specific decision or to conduct investigative (search) or procedural actions. An analysis of court decisions according to which courts provide an assessment of the procedural activities of the subjects of evidence collection in criminal proceedings at the stage of pre-trial investigation, including their relevance and admissibility. Thus, attention is paid to the assessment of courts on the legality of the presence of persons during investigative (investigative) or procedural actions; the correctness of fixing such a presence. In addition, the situations of appointment of relevant subjects in criminal proceedings to fulfill their powers are considered. It is proposed to supplement the first part of Article 236 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine with a provision that clarifies the grounds for the stay and authority of the employee of the operational and investigative service during the search.


2020 ◽  
pp. 122-126
Author(s):  
V.S. Suslova ◽  
O.I. Tyshchenko

The article is devoted to the research of topical issues of application of the institute of preventive measures in criminal proceedings on the basis of the analysis of normative provisions of the current criminal procedure legislation and law enforcement practice. It is emphasized that the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine 2012 (hereinafter - the CPC of Ukraine) provides for an updated system of preventive measures, unlike the CPC of 1960. Attention is drawn to the degree of restriction of human rights and freedoms in the application of preventive measures. The purpose of this article is to analyze topical issues regarding the grounds and procedural order for the application of preventive measures in criminal proceedings and to offer optimal ways of solving them. The author has come to the conclusion that at this stage criminal procedural legislation in terms of regulation of preventive measures needs improvement. The article investigates the types and reasons for choosing preventive measures, which determined the author's position on the need to consolidate at the legislative level the definition of the term "preventive measures". The scientific positions of different authors on the issues related to the application of preventive measures are analyzed, in particular, the views of the processional scientists on the concept of "preventive measures". This made it possible to demonstrate the existence of a rather wide range of scientific proposals for defining this concept at the legislative level. Attention is drawn to the fact that, in practice, the right of a person to liberty and personal integrity when choosing a preventive measure in the form of detention is quite often unduly restricted. The materials of the case law, legal provisions of the ECtHR, Letter of the High Specialized Court of Ukraine on Civil and Criminal Matters "On Some Issues of Preventive Measures During Pre-trial Investigation and Proceeding in the Procedure Provided by the Criminal Procedure" Code of Ukraine of 04.04.2013 are used.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document