scholarly journals Failure to Comply with the Legal Requirements of the Bailiff as a Sign of Violation of the Legislation on Enforcement Proceedings

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (91) ◽  
pp. 29-33
Author(s):  
A.O. Shveyger ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Requirements ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Objective Side ◽  
Administrative Code ◽  
Administrative Responsibility

The sphere of enforcement proceedings is a part of the system of the mechanism for the implementation of judicial acts and acts of other bodies and officials adopted in order to implement the legislation of the Russian Federation and restore broken relations. Officials of the enforcement agency have the authority to make decisions that are binding on their addressees. In case of failure to comply with such decisions, the current legislation provides for administrative liability. In judicial practice, disagreements often arise about the content of the objective side of Article 17.14 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. The article analyzes the question of the characteristics and scope of the bailiff’s requirements, the failure to comply with which entails administrative responsibility. The conclusion about the legality or illegality of bringing to administrative responsibility for this offense is argued.

scholarly journals SOME ISSUES OF INVOLVEMENT TO ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITY FOR VIOLATION OF ESTABLISHED INTERIM RESTRICTIVE MEASURES IN THE CONDITIONS OF THE COVID-19 NEW CORONAVIRUS INFECTION PANDEMIC

2021 ◽  
Vol 6(72) (3) ◽  
pp. 331-337
Author(s):  
V. V. Konoplev ◽  
A. V. Basov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Coronavirus Infection ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Objective Side ◽  
Administrative Code ◽  
Restrictive Measures ◽  
Administrative Responsibility

The article analyzes the issues regarding the definition of some aspects of bringing to administrative responsibility for violation of the established temporary restrictive measures in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Special attention is paid to the analysis of changes in the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation due to the need to strengthen measures of responsibility in the field of ensuring sanitary and epidemiological well-being. One of the novels are offenses under Part 2, Part 3 of Art. 6.3 Administrative Code, as well as Art. 20.6.1 Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. The features of the objective side of these offenses are established, as well as a list of subjects of these offenses.

scholarly journals Authorities and Officials of the Prosecutor’s Office as Subjects of Protection and Subjects of Violation of the Constitutional Right of Citizens to Petition

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 33-43
Author(s):  
I. V. Timoshenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Public Power ◽  
The Status ◽  
Effective Instrument ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
Objective Side ◽  
Administrative Code ◽  
The Right

The paper analyzes the status of bodies and officials of the prosecutor’s office as subjects of protection and subjects of violation of the constitutional right of citizens of Russia to petition as bodies exercising public power, whereas the very norm-principle of the basic Russian law on the right of citizens to petition is considered both as a constitutional right and as a constitutional safeguard. The author identifies the main practical problems, legal gaps and conflicts of law when citizens implement their constitutional right to petition and their reasons. The author proposes options for their elimination at the law-making and law-enforcement levels. It is noted that article 5.59 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences from 2011 providing administrative liability for violation of established procedure of consideration of citizens’ petitions, despite being a very effective instrument for the legal protection of the right under consideration, needs to be adjusted because its discretionary part contains only general language and does not reveal the objective side of this administrative offence. At the same time, prosecutor’s offices have long developed a certain practice concerning the application of Art. 5.59 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation as a means of public and legal protection of the violated right of citizens to petition. However, what should be done if the right of citizens to petition is violated by the prosecutors themselves with their special status as subjects of the offense, whereas it is the exclusive competence of prosecutors by operation of law to initiate cases under Art. 5.59 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation? The paper is devoted to the search for the answer to this question.

Problems of administrative responsibility for violation of the law on banks and banking

2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 126-136
Author(s):  
Гончарук ◽  
Natalya Goncharuk ◽  
Кулаженкова ◽  
Nataliya Kulazhenkova
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Research Topic ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Federal Laws ◽  
The Law ◽  
Banks And Banking ◽  
Administrative Code ◽  
Administrative Responsibility

In the article the phenomenon of discussion in legal science and practice, of administrative responsibility for violation of the law on banks and banking activities is discussed. The relevance of the research topic is determined by the fact that the litigation of violations in this sphere causes difficulties in judicial practice, because the rules of banks and banking activities are also contained in other federal laws, causing significant controversy in determining proper measures of responsibility. The article provides a comparative analysis of the legal liability for violation of the law on banks and banking activities, provided by the rules of the Administrative Code and the Federal Law «On the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Bank of Russia)»; types of interventions provided for banking offenses are discussed and the ways of solving the problem are indicated.

Review of the Practice of Consideration of Cases of Administrative Offenses under Article 6.1.1 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 60-75
Author(s):  
T. V. Fedorova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Controversial Issues ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Code

The review examines the procedure for judges of courts of General jurisdiction in resolving cases of administrative offenses under article 6.1.1 of the administrative Code of the Russian Federation, and analyzes the practice of courts in various regions of the Russian Federation. The paper offers solutions to controversial issues of judicial practice, considers the positions of the constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the circumstances to be clarified in the case of an administrative offense under article 6.1.1 of the administrative Code of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals Statutes of Limitations on Bringing to Administrative Responsibility and the Procedure for their Calculation in the Context of Constitutional Law Principles

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 32-43
Author(s):  
A. K. Subachev
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Constitutional Principle ◽  
Special Procedure ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
One Year ◽  
Administrative Code ◽  
Administrative Responsibility

The initial version of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences provided for a general statute of limitations (two months) and a special statute of limitations (one year from the date of the commission of an administrative offense) for administrative liability. As a result of multiple amendments to part 1 of Art. 4.5 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, the special terms were increased to two, three and six years depending on the type of an administrative offense. In addition, initially part 4 of Art. 4.5 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation established a special procedure for calculating the statute of limitations for bringing to administrative responsibility in case of refusal to initiate criminal proceedings or dismissal of the case. The statute of limitation commenced from the date when the decision was made to refuse to initiate proceedings or to dismiss the case. Although the provision under consideration was later brought into line with the general rule, the legislator considered it necessary to supplement Art. 4.5 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation with parts 5.1, 6, 6.1 and 7, linking the beginning of the statute of limitations for administrative liability for certain administrative offenses with certain legal facts. As a result of the study, the author has revealed the discrepancy between the mentioned legislative innovations and the constitutional principle of proportionality of restrictions imposed by the legislator on the rights and freedoms and the principle of legal certainty. The author makes a proposal to improve the current legal regulation of the statute of limitations with regard to bringing to administrative responsibility and the procedure for their calculation.

scholarly journals Differntiation between Rational and Sustainable Use of Natural Resources in Land Law

Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 54-66
Author(s):  
E. V. Luneva
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Natural Resources ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Land Reclamation ◽  
Sustainable Use ◽  
Land Law ◽  
Rational Use ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Code ◽  
Administrative Responsibility

The rational use of natural resources in land law is understood as the increase in the ecological efficiency of the use of natural resources, including the quality improvement. the paper identifies the types of public relations concerning the rational use of natural resources in land law: 1) improvement of the state of the natural environment and the ecological situation in general; 2) improvement of the quality of land as a separate natural resource and a natural object; 3) land reclamation; 4) land restoration; 5) additional reproduction of land fertility; 6) other relationships aimed at improving the sustainability of environmental systems of which land is a part. On the example of Part 2 Art. 8.7 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, Para. 2 of Art. 45, Para. 2 of Art. 46 and Para. 1 of Art. 47 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation the paper shows the significance of differentiation between rational and sustainable use of natural resources in land law for law enforcement. The proposed differntiation leads to overcoming legal uncertainty when bringing to administrative responsibility and forced termination of rights to land plots for failure to fulfill mandatory measures for the land improvement. The author substantiates the supression from the objective side of the administrative offense provided by Part 2 of Art. 8.7 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, of the failure to act on mandatory improvement of lands. The reasons for the proposed change of the rule include: 1) the absence in law enforcement practice of the facts of bringing to administrative responsibility under Part 2 Art. 8.7 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation for failure to comply with mandatory measures to improve lands; 2) recognition by courts in most cases of the design of part 2 of Art. 8.7 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation as a formally defined crime; 3) the study of Part 2 Article 8.7 of the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation in the science of Land Law exclusively in the context of the failure to implement mandatory measures to protect land and soil; 4) only social relations in the field of preservation and protection of land against negative impact can be the object of an administrative violation.

scholarly journals Features of the qualification of insult to an employee of the FPS of Russia as a representative of authorities

2021 ◽  
Vol 225 (2) ◽  
pp. 46-51
Author(s):  
K.A. SHILOV ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Key Words ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Objective Side

Abstract. The article analyzes the scientific literature, judicial practice on the specific characteristics of qualifying an insult to an employee of the FPS of Russia as a representative of the authorities. Proposals and additions to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are formulated. Key words: qualifications, criminal liability, insult, employee of the FPS of Russia, a sign of publicity, the objective side of the insult.

The vacation season is coming: remember the procedure for calculating them in budget organizations

2020 ◽  
pp. 11-21
Author(s):  
Valentina Suprotkina
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Labor Law ◽  
Time Limits ◽  
Holiday Season ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Code ◽  
Administrative Responsibility

With the onset of the holiday season, accountants will increase their work, because it is they who will have to calculate the vacation pay to employees of their institutions. Article 136 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation establishes that the payment of vacation pay to a person going on vacation must be made three days before it begins. For violation of the specified time limits to the institution, administrative responsibility measures provided for in art. 5.27 Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. How to timely calculate vacation pay, determine the estimated values when creating a reserve for vacation pay, re‘ect in the accounting of budgetary organizations and prevent mistakes and violations of labor law — we will consider this article.

scholarly journals Analytical review of antitrust judicial practice (second half of 2019)

2019 ◽  
pp. 74-77
Author(s):  
L. V. Vovkivskaya ◽  
E. V. Savostina
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Antitrust Laws ◽  
Analytical Review ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Responsibility

The review contains an analysis of the legal positions of the arbitration courts of the Russian Federation in cases of violation of the antimonopoly legislation regarding the consideration of the following issues: the primacy of antimonopoly control in relation to entities holding a dominant position; creation by the customer of unequal conditions for the participation of persons in procurement; inaction of the authority, leading to restriction of competition; creating benefits for a particular business entity during the procurement; repetition when brought to administrative responsibility. The purpose of the analytical review is the formation of uniform approaches in law enforcement practice in cases of violation of antitrust laws.

Features of the criminal evaluation of objective signs of timber smuggling (Art. 226.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation)

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (4) ◽  
pp. 62-72
Author(s):  
Arbi Akiev ◽  
Daria Fisenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Modus Operandi ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legislative Structure ◽  
The Moment ◽  
Objective Side ◽  
Enforcement Activity

In the article the authors examine certain problems of qualification of smuggling of timber being one of the types of strategically important goods and resources for the Russian Federation. These problems are stipulated by the specific of the legislative structure, as well as by the difficulties of interpreting this corpus delicti. Within the frame of the research it was established that that most difficulties in law enforcement activity arise in the course of criminal-legal assessment of the objective signs of timber smuggling and, mostly, of the subject of the corpus delicti under consideration and modus operandi of the crime due to the specifics of timber being the object of smuggling. In order to solve problems stated in the article, the authors analyze such ob-jective signs of corpus delicti provided for by Art. 2261 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as a subject and an objective side on the basis of materials of of-ficial statistics, judicial practice and criminal law doctrine. As a result of the conducted analysis the authors’ recommendations on the qualification of timber smuggling are formulated. Thus, the authors clearly identified the established in the current customs legislation a list of types of timber related to the subject of the crime provided for by Art. 2261 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation; the most common modus operandi of timber smuggling in judicial practice are explained; the moment of completion of the criminal encroachment under analysis is clarified, and the amount of damage necessary to qualify the timber smuggling under Art. 2261 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are defined.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document