THE INFLUENCE OF CODIFICATION OF LEGISLATION ON THE CHOICE OF FORMS OF COURT PROCEEDINGS: ADMINISTRATIVE OR CIVIL

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 225-236
Author(s):  
M.B. VELICHKO
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Correct Choice ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Administrative Proceedings

The problem of the correct choice of forms of legal proceedings in this article will be considered in a narrow aspect, through the influence of the codification of legislation, analysis of the nature of such rules of law as аrt. 11 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on the procedure for judicial protection of civil rights, art. 12 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on how to protect civil rights, art. 13 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on the invalidation of acts of subjects of public authority. The relevance of the research topic is due to the practical tasks of correctly determining the type of legal proceedings, as well as determining the place and role of administrative proceedings as an independent element of legal regulation and a form of judicial activity, the need to increase its effectiveness in achieving the goals of protecting the rights, freedoms, and legitimate interests of citizens and organizations. The rationale for the existence of the problem in this aspect is that many procedural scientists assign the role of the “life form of material industries” to the procedural branches, as a result of which one of their criteria for differentiating civil and administrative proceedings is the branch affiliation of the method of protection chosen by the plaintiff. In the literature, there are judgments that cases considered in the order of administrative proceedings are clearly defined by law in the Special Part of the Code of Administrative Procedure of the Russian Federation and cannot be expanded and supplemented without introducing appropriate changes to the legislation.

scholarly journals Electronic Money: the Problem of Determining the Place in the System of Objects of Civil Rights

Legal Concept ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 110-115
Author(s):  
Ekaterina Vavilova
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Electronic Money ◽  
Advanced Level ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Russian Federation

Introduction: with the development of the digital economy, the sphere of non-cash payments reaches its peak value. This legal institution is particularly important in connection with the goal set in Russia’s strategic documents to improve the quality of non-cash payments and bring them to a new, technologically advanced level. The good legal regulation of certain legal issues in this regard is one of the most urgent tasks of the modern state. In this regard, the author aims to study an important element of the system of non-cash payments –electronic money – and determine its place in the civil rights system. Methods: the methodological framework for this research is a set of methods of scientific knowledge, among which the main ones are the comparative legal method, as well as the methods of systematicity and analysis. Results: the author’s well-founded position is based on the analysis of the legislation and opinions of the scientists expressed in the competent scientific community on the issue of recognizing electronic money as an object of civil rights and, accordingly, assigning it to a certain category of objects named in Article 128 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Conclusions: the study proved that the lack of full understanding of the legal nature of electronic money was connected with the unresolved issue of its belonging to the objects of civil rights, in whose connection it substantiated the belonging of electronic money to the rights of obligation to claim to be included in Article 128 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation as an object of civil rights.

scholarly journals PROBLEMS OF LEGAL REGULATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE DELIVERY AND DETENTION

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (91) ◽  
pp. 54-59
Author(s):  
Maksims Bashlikovs
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Delivery Time ◽  
Specific Time ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Time Limits ◽  
Office Space ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Proceedings

The purpose of this work is to study the problems of legal regulation of administrative delivery and detention in Russian administrative law and the study of possible ways to solve them. This problem is due to the fact that the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation. The delivery time is not specified as a measure to secure proceedings on cases of administrative offenses, which is a flaw in administrative legislation and may violate the rights and freedoms of a person and citizen. And the law does not establish the duration of a person’s time in office space and his waiting for the start of legal proceedings which is a serious legislative gap. The novelty of this work lies in the formulation by Autor’s of modern and effective proposals for the revision of individual issues related to measures of administrative proceedings and the reality of solving these problems. The Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation must be modified accordingly in order to clearly regulate or establish specific time limits for the delivery in police office and the time to wait for the commencement of proceedings. In this paper, the above problems and progressive solutions are discussed in detail.

scholarly journals Constitution of the Russian Federation within the system of sources of judicial administrative and procedure law

2020 ◽  
pp. 31-38
Author(s):  
Daria Dmitrievna Rozhkova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Primary Source ◽  
Constitutional Reform ◽  
Special Role ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Positive Assessment ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Proceedings

This article explores the question of sources of judicial administrative procedure law of the Russian Federation. Attention is turned to the special role of the Constitution of the Russian Federation among other sources of this branch of law, since its provisions are basic for the development of judicial administrative procedure in modern Russia.  Emphasis is made on the Chapters 2, 3 and 7 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the prescriptions of which develop in the Code of Administrative Procedure of the Russian Federation. From the administrative and procedural perspective, the author analyzes the results of the constitutional reform of 2020, which put to the forefront the question on the Constitution as primary source of the Russian public law. The main conclusion the conducted research consists in specification of thesis on the Constitution as a source of judicial administrative procedure law in the provision that the constitutional text views administrative proceedings as equal and sovereign form of legal proceedings alongside other forms, the essence of which lies in hearing administrative cases. At the same time, the Constitution employs the term “administrative procedure legislation” that implies a set of normative legal acts, which serve as the basis for the activity of judicial authorities with regards to hearing administrative cases. The author gives positive assessment to the results of the constitutional reform of 2020, although notice that certain proposals made by the representatives of public legal science were unimplemented by the legislators.

scholarly journals Problems of correlation and distinctions of types of court proceedings, judgment and competence of civil and administrative cases

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (12) ◽  
pp. 133-137
Author(s):  
S. V. ZAVITOVA ◽  
◽  
YU. S. ARTAMONOVA ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Domestic Legislation ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Administrative Proceedings

The article analyzes the problem of correlation and distinction of types of legal proceedings, in particular, it considers how civil and administrative proceedings are qualified when considering certain categories of cases by courts of general jurisdiction at different stages of the process. In modern domestic legislation there are no clear criteria for distinguishing the type of legal proceedings when choosing a procedure for protecting violated rights, freedoms 134 IUS PUBLICUM ET PRIVATUM В 2015 г. вступил в силу Кодекс административного судопроизводства Российской Федерации (КАС РФ) – процедура защиты прав, законных интересов граждан и организаций от нарушений со стороны органов государственной власти была регламентирована и зафиксирована как самостоятельная правовая основа1 . Нельзя не заметить, что юридическое закрепление порядка рассмотрения дел и разрешения споров, возникших из административно-правовых отношений, в принятом КАС РФ спровоцировало появление коллизий при применении норм Гражданского процессуального кодекса Российской Федерации (ГПК РФ)2 и КАС РФ в процессе рассмотрения дел различных категорий. Кроме того, встал принципиальный вопрос: как правильно разграничить виды судопроизводства в целях должной защиты нарушенных прав? КАС РФ содержит перечень дел, подлежащих рассмотрению по правилам административного судопроизводства, но не дает разъяснения, в чем состоит отличие от дел, рассматриваемых в порядке гражданского судопроизводства. Верховным Судом Российской Федерации сформулированы правила определения вида судопроизводства для судов общей юрисдикции. Так, в первую очередь выделяется разграничение характера публичных и непубличных правоотношений. В данном случае во внимание берется наличие или отсутствие властных полномочий у субъектов административных правоотношений. Вовторых, Верховный Суд Российской Федерации рекомендует учитывать последствия, к которым приводят споры о признании решений, действия (бездействия) органов власти недействительными3. Изучение судебной практики показывает, что в некоторых случаях у судов возникали сложности при разрешении вопроса о том, в порядке какого судопроизводства следует рассматривать и разрешать дела об оспаривании решений, действий (бездействия) органов государственной власти, органов местного самоуправления, организаций, наделенных отдельными государственными или иными публичными полномочиями, должностных лиц, государственных и муниципальных служащих. Так, например, гражданин Р. обратился в Вологодский городской суд с административным исковым заявлением к БУЗ ВО «Вологодский областной наркологический диспансер № 1» о признании незаконными действий врача учреждения по проведению медицинского освидетельствования на состояние опьянения и акта медицинского освидетельствования на состояние опьянения. В обосновании требований истец указал, что медицинское освидетельствование в отношении него проведено в отсутствие законных оснований, акт медицинского освидетельствования не содержит сведений о концентрации каннабиноидов в исследованной пробе, копия акта незаконно направлена работодателю, что послужило основанием для увольнения. Определением Вологодского городского суда от 24.12.2018 гражданину Р. отказано в принятии административного искового заявления, поскольку акт медицинского освидетельствования на состояние опьянения не влечет самостоятельных последствий для лица, в отношении которого он составлен, следовательно, не может быть предметом самостоятельного оспаривания в суде. Также судом указано, что требования истца о признании незаконными действий врача по проведению медицинского освидетельствования на состояние опьянения подлежат рассмотрению в порядке, предусмотренном ГПК РФ. Суд апелляционной инстанции в своем определении от 06.03.2019 № 33а-1227/2019 and legitimate interests. The article analyzes the norms of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the Code of Administrative Procedure of the Russian Federation in determining the jurisdiction of cases to courts of general and arbitration jurisdiction and also touches on the issue of transition to consideration of cases according to the rules of civil and (or) administrative proceedings.

Human Rights Activities as a Function of the Prosecutor’s Office

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 88-93
Author(s):  
K.N. Golikov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
The State ◽  
Main Function ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

The subject of this article is the problems of the nature, essence and purpose of prosecutorial activity. The purpose of the article is to study and justify the role of the human rights function in prosecutorial activities in the concept of a modern legal state. At the heart of prosecutorial activity is the implementation of the main function of the Prosecutor’s office – its rights and freedoms, their protection. This means that any type (branch) of Prosecutor's supervision is permeated with human rights content in relation to a citizen, society, or the state. This is confirmed by the fact that the Federal law “On the Prosecutor's office of the Russian Federation” establishes an independent type of Prosecutor's supervision-supervision over the observance of human and civil rights and freedoms. It is argued that the legislation enshrines the human rights activities of the Prosecutor's office as its most important function. It is proposed to add this to the Law “On the Prosecutor's office of the Russian Federation”.

INHERITANCE OF THE PROPERTY OF A MEMBER OF A PEASANT (FARMER) FARM

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Татьяна Алексеевна Безгодкова ◽  
Людмила Дмитриевна Туршук
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Peasant Farmer ◽  
Legal Entity ◽  
The Russian Federation

В статье рассматриваются проблемы правового регулирования наследования имущества члена крестьянского (фермерского) хозяйства. КФХ может существовать в двух формах: как юридическое лицо и без образования юридического лица. ГК РФ определяет порядок перехода по наследству имущества лишь КФХ без образования юридического лица. The article deals with the problems of legal regulation of inheritance of property of a member of a peasant (farmer) farm. PFF can exist in two forms: as a legal entity and without the formation of a legal entity. The Civil Code of the Russian Federation defines the procedure for the inheritance of property only in a farm without the formation of a legal entity.

scholarly journals A Prohibition to Receive Remuneration (Gifts) in Connection with the Performance of Official Duties as a Measure of Anti-Corruption Criminological Security

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 660-675
Author(s):  
Irina Damm ◽  
Aleksey Tarbagaev ◽  
Evgenii Akunchenko
Keyword(s):  
Public Sphere ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Civil Service ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Public Sphere ◽  
To Receive

A prohibition for persons holding government (municipal) positions, for government (municipal) employees, and some other employees of the public sphere who are public officials to receive remuneration (gifts) is aimed at preventing bribery (Art. 290, 291, 291.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), and could be viewed as a measure of anti-corruption criminological security. However, the existing collisions of civil, administrative and criminal law norms that regulate this prohibition lead to an ongoing discussion in research publications and complexities in practice. The goal of this research is to study the conditions and identify the problems of the legal regulation of receiving remuneration (gifts) in connection with the performance of official duties that prevent the implementation of anti-corruption criminological security. The authors use the legal theory of security measures to analyze the provisions of Clause 3, Part 1, Art. 575 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and Clause 6, Part 1, Art. 17 of the Federal Law «About the Public Civil Service in the Russian Federation», examine the doctrinal approaches to defining the priority of enforcing the above-mentioned norms, study the significant features of the category «ordinary gift» and conduct its evaluation from the standpoint of differentiating between gifts and bribes, also in connection with the criteria of the insignificance of the corruption deed. The empirical basis of the study is the decisions of courts of general jurisdiction. The authors also used their experience of working in Commissions on the observance of professional behavior and the resolution of conflicts of interests at different levels. The conducted research allowed the authors to come to the following fundamental conclusions: 1) the special security rule under Clause 6, Part 1, Art. 17 of the Federal Law «About the Public Civil Service in the Russian Federation», which sets a full prohibition for government employees to receive remuneration (gifts) in connection with the performance of official duties, contradicts Clause 3, Part 1, Art. 575 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (the existing legal-linguistic vagueness of categories in Art. 575 of the CC of the RF leads to problems in law enforcement and makes a negative impact on the anti-corruption mentality of people); 2) as the concepts «gift» and «bribe» do not logically intersect, the development of additional normative legal criteria for their delineation seems to be unpromising and will lead to a new wave of scholastic and practical disagreements; 3) the introduction of a uniform and blanket ban on receiving remuneration (gifts) in the public sphere by eliminating Clause 3, Part 1, Art. 575 of the CC of the RF seems to be an effective measure of preventing bribery, and its application is justified until Russian society develops sustainable anti-corruption mentality.

scholarly journals Security Measures and Liability Measures in Loan Agreements

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Artur Ilfarovich Khabirov ◽  
Gulnara Mullanurovna Khamitova
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Security Measures ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Rights And Interests

The Civil Code of the Russian Federation regulates the use of various measures to protect violated rights and interests: first, these include universal methods for protecting civil rights (article 12 of the Civil Code); second, these include provisions of Chapter 25 of the Civil Code regarding the liability for violating one's obligations; both of them jointly comprising the institution of protection of civil rights. This article studies the issue of consequences for violating a party's duties under a loan agreement. The article differentiates safeguarding measures and liability measures to be used in case of an offense. The article also makes a conclusion regarding whether such differentiation is appropriate. Based on such differentiation, we analyze Paragraph 1 of Chapter 42 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

Organizational and Legal Peculiarities of Operations of Regional Control and Accounts Authorities of Russia — Members of the European Organization of Regional Institutions of External Public Finance Audit: On the Efficiency of Membership in EURORAI

Financial law ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 3-9
Author(s):  
Igor B. Lagutin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Finance ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
External Control ◽  
European Organization ◽  
Regional Institutions ◽  
Regional Control ◽  
The Russian Federation

This article is devoted to the study of the characteristics of the organization, activities and legal regulation of the European Organization of Regional External Public Finance Audit Institutions (EURORAI). The role of EURORAI in the development of Russian legislation governing the organization and activities of the control and accounting bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and municipalities is analyzed. The article studies the structure, powers and composition of participants in the European Organization of Regional External Public Finance Audit Institutions (EURORAI). Separately, the article considers the issue of legal support for the organization and activities of the European Organization of regional bodies of external control of public finances, as well as its international legal status. The article concludes that the effectiveness of the interaction between the control and accounting bodies — members of EURORAI, is at a low level and practically does not have any effect on the activities of the control and accounting bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, and is more important for improving its legal status in the regional level.

Problems of ECHR Decisions Implementation into Domestic Law

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (6) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Татьяна Шуберт ◽  
Tatyana Shubert
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Systematic Approach ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
European Court ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Government ◽  
Domestic Law

The article examines the ECHR legal nature and types of its decisions, analyzes the activities of the Government of the Russian Federation and the RF Ministry of Justice on the implementation of the European Court of Human Rights’ judgments. The author notes the role of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in ensuring uniform application of the Convention and Protocols thereto, ratified by the Russian Federation, by the courts of general jurisdiction. The author analyzes reasons for slow and incomplete implementation of the ECHR decisions, and comes up with the measures for their implementation. The article discusses peculiarities of the execution of the ECHR judgments in the Russian Federation: mechanistic execution of the decisions, lack of a systematic approach to the legislation analysis, absence of identification of causes for non-compliance of the regulations with the Convention on Rights of Man and Citizen, lack of coordination between bodies executing the ECHR decisions, inadequate budgetary procedures and lack of funds. The author proposes to analyze structural and general deficiencies in the national law and practice with regard to the ECHR decisions; provides recommendations to improve the mechanism for the judicial decisions’ implementation; determines lines of development for legal regulation of relations in the field of ECHR judgments’ implementation in the Russian legislation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document