scholarly journals The history of the development of civil procedural law of Ukraine on judicial protection of the property legal right to land

2021 ◽  
pp. 147-155
Author(s):  
Andrii Shabalin
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
Independent State ◽  
Judicial Procedure ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
Legal Right

Keywords: civil procedural protection, court, violation of private property rights toland, civil procedure The article is devoted to the study of the historical and legal aspects of the judicial procedure for theprotection of property rights to land in Ukrainian legislation. The author investigates themain stages of legal protection of property legal rights to land, in each historical periodits own characteristics of the aforementioned procedure for the protection of the correspondingproperty right are determined. Considerable attention is paid to the issues ofthe peculiarities of legal regulation and judicial procedure for the protection of propertylegal rights to land. In this scientific article, the author pays considerable attention to thedevelopment of judicial protection of legal property rights to land in the historical periodof the emergence of the independent state of Ukraine (1917−1918 yy). The author of thearticle writes that during this period the legal right to land received significant development:the land plot could be inherited, the right to rent the land could also be inherited.The procedure for the judicial protection of the legal right to land had no legal peculiarities.The author describes that during the Soviet period of Ukraine's existence, there was no legal property right to land. Only the state could have legal property rights to land.This means that the courts did not protect the private property legal right to land. Onlywhen Ukraine became an independent state did a private property legal right to landemerge. During this historical period, a significant number of legal instruments for theprotection of proprietary legal rights to land appeared in the legislation of independentUkraine. The property legal right to land was protected by the court. It is the judicialprotection of the property legal right to land that is democratic and meets the Europeandemocratic standards for the protection of property rights. The modern features of thegenesis of legal protection of property legal rights to land, which are protected by thecourt in the civil procedure of Ukraine, have been investigated. The author has createdand described new stages in the development of civil procedural protection of legal propertyrights to land.

scholarly journals FEATURES AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC COMPONENTS OF THE CONCEPTS “INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY” AND “RIGHT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY”

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (42) ◽  
pp. 99-116
Author(s):  
Oksana Korotiuk
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Intellectual Property Right ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
Legal Personality

The article is devoted to the content of the concepts "intellectual property" and "right of intellectual property", as well as to the possibility to use them as equivalent concepts. The author considers the features of a broad understanding of the intellectual property concept, in which it is revealed as a complex set of social relations arising at all levels of public life. According to this approach intellectual relations are only one type of the varieties of intellectual property relations, the totality of which only occasionally acts as the subject of legal regulation. Taking into account the above facts, the difference between the meaning of the concepts "intellectual property" (in the sense of this concept as a social relation) and "intellectual property right" is reflected in the content of the structural elements of the relations that denote these concepts: 1) Subjects of intellectual property rights are determined on the basis of compliance with certain legal requirements regarding legal personality, as well as the acquisition of subjective legal rights and obligations, which are provided to them by legal norms (by using their legal personality); the subjects of intellectual property become participants of social relations of different levels, including those, which are outside the legal regulation. Such interactions may be related to realization of creative abilities of a person, mental activity, etc.; 2) In the centre of understanding of the concept "object of intellectual property rights" is the content of intellectual property rights as a totality of personal non-property and property rights. The defining aspect of legal protection is the right to the created object of intellectual property rights. At the same time the object of intellectual property is a value in socio-philosophical sense that satisfies the social, economic, cultural, mental and other needs and interests of people. In this sense, an object by its nature is a blessing for a person; 3) Social connections between the subjects of intellectual relations are revealed through corresponding rights and obligations of the participants of these relations; in the relations of intellectual property social relations manifest themselves as interaction between people in different spheres of social life, based on the corresponding social statuses and roles, in which individuals carry out creative activity, realize their mental and cultural needs, etc. Understanding the concept "intellectual property" as identical with the concept “intellectual property right” is based on a normative approach. This approach shows that the concepts of “intellectual property” and “intellectual property right” have the same sense in the legislation and can denote both objects of intellectual property right and rights to such objects.

scholarly journals Peculiarities of protection of private rights by non-jurisdiction methods of settlement of legal disputes (conflicts)

2021 ◽  
pp. 23-29
Author(s):  
Iryna YEFREMOVA
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Legal Relationship ◽  
Private Rights ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Judicial Protection

Introduction. Adoption of new laws of civil and substantive law, the novelty of legal relations governed by the rules of these laws, the complexity of civil conflicts arising from these legal relations, require a high level of legal protection, compliance with the rule of law by all members of society. Only the law allows interested parties to choose the form of protection. This form can be traditional – jurisdictional (provides for the establishment of a body and procedure for the protection of violated rights), and non-jurisdictional (but certainly allowed by law), which may resort to interested parties. obstacle to the exercise of the right. Resolution of legal conflicts is possible not only through a jurisdictional form of protection. A non-jurisdictional form of protection of civil rights is the independent protection of a person of his violated rights. That is, the person does not apply to the competent state authorities. In fact, it is the commission of actual actions aimed at protecting and securing their personal property and other non-property rights. The purpose of the paper is a thorough study of models of non-jurisdictional protection of property rights in the system of protection of civil rights by analyzing the theoretical and practical aspects of using alternative methods of protection of private rights in general and mediation. Result. It is determined that the non-jurisdictional form of protection of civil rights is the actions of citizens and organizations aimed at protecting their own civil rights, freedoms, and legally protected interests. It is noted that these actions are carried out and implemented by eligible entities independently, without seeking legal assistance from government agencies and structures, as well as officials. It is determined that the mechanism of legal protection is implemented in non-jurisdictional ways in the field of legal regulation when it is necessary to overcome and eliminate obstacles that arise in the exercise of rights and legitimate interests of the subject of law, in other words – to quickly protect (ensure) legal status. It is determined that in international practice, namely in European countries, the basis of non-jurisdictional protection of property rights is mainly in the use of negotiation and mediation procedures. Non-jurisdictional form, which is usually local in nature, is achieved as a result of actual actions, occurs not in jurisdictional or procedural forms, but within the protected substantive legal relations, which are the subjects of such legal relations (usually imply The main difference between jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional forms of protection of rights is that the protection of rights in jurisdictional form is carried out by the competent state and public authorities with each of them a certain procedural order of activity, while protection in a non-jurisdictional form takes place within the framework of a substantive legal relationship and is carried out by the parties themselves in the legal relationship. Conclusion. The study proves that in Ukraine, priority should be given to the development of various forms of out-of-court dispute resolution. The basis for this should be the legislative consolidation of out-of-court settlement of civil disputes as one of the basic principles of protection of violated private rights (of course, without revoking or replacing the right to judicial protection). Non-jurisdictional methods of protection of private rights are defined in the legislation of Ukraine and can be used due to the dispositive nature of the civil law method of regulation. However, this is insufficient, as participants in civil legal relations in case of violation of their rights are primarily confronted in the law with a defined right to judicial protection of violated rights, and often consider the court as the only possible form of protection.

The right to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuliya Samovich
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Educational Organizations ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Procedure ◽  
The Right ◽  
Judicial Protection

The manual is devoted to making individual complaints to the European Court of human rights: peculiarities of realization of the right to appeal, conditions of admissibility and the judicial procedure of the European Court of Human Rights. The author analyses some “autonomous concepts” used in the court's case law and touches upon the possibility of limiting the right to judicial protection. The article deals with the formation and development of the individual's rights to international judicial protection, as well as the protection of human rights in universal quasi-judicial international bodies and regional judicial institutions of the European Union and the Organization of American States. This publication includes a material containing an analysis of recent changes in the legal regulation of the Institute of individual complaints. The manual is recommended for students of educational organizations of higher education, studying in the areas of bachelor's and master's degree “Jurisprudence”.

Risk, Property Rights, and Antidiscrimination Law in Rental Housing: Toward a Property-in-Action Framework

2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 871-901
Author(s):  
Marco Brydolf-Horwitz
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Rental Housing ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
Criminal Records ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Private Market ◽  
Antidiscrimination Law ◽  
Risk Discourse ◽  
Housing Outcomes

Landlords’ decisions significantly shape the housing outcomes of poor and stigmatized renters. Despite this important gatekeeping role, studies of antidiscrimination law have not thoroughly examined how private market actors respond to reform efforts or how private property rights potentially enable them to evade regulation. This study draws on ethnographic data gathered between late 2015 and early 2018 to examine how and why Seattle landlords opposed an ordinance regulating the use of criminal records in rental housing. The findings indicate that landlords’ opposition stems from their expectation that property protects owners’ ability to control their exposure to risk. Yet conceptions of property and risk perception alone cannot explain how landlords can evade regulation. Toward this end, I show how private property rights facilitate adaptation by which landlords can legally circumvent the intent of the law. The study highlights the value of a sociolegal framework of property in action, which incorporates cultural notions of ownership, legal rights, and the regulatory and market environments that shape owners’ discretion. I suggest that greater attention to risk discourse and property rights will deepen our understanding of the limits of antidiscrimination law and the ability of private market actors to adapt to, and resist, legal reform efforts.

scholarly journals LEGITIMATE PERMISSIONS AND SPECIFITY OF THEIR ENFORCEABILITY IN MODERN RUSSIA

2014 ◽  
pp. 180-187
Author(s):  
V. Subochev ◽  
A. Sheriev
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Difference ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
The State ◽  
Northern Caucasus ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
Legal Enforcement ◽  
Legitimate Interest ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
Russian Law ◽  
Legal Right

Northern Caucasus Institute of Advanced Training (branch) of Krasnodar University of Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, 123, Malbahova Street, Nalshik, 360016, Russia. Abstract: The article investigates the basic legal permissions in Russian law - legal rights, freedoms and legitimate interests. Potential of these means of legal regulation is examined as well as their common features and essential differences. Authors argue that the effectiveness of the mechanism of legal regulation largely depends on the proper use of legal permissions. Particular attention is paid to such kind of legal mean as a legitimate interest. The article draws attention to the fact that if a legal right or freedom are such kind of permissions which are guaranteed by the law in order to sustain certain demands of subjects of law, the legitimate interest is qualitatively different mean of regulation. The authors suggest considering a legitimate interest as reflected in the objective law legal possibility of subjects of law to enjoy certain social benefits and to seek protection from the state authorities in order to meet their interests which are not contradictory to provisions of law. Qualitative difference between legitimate interest and legal right and freedom is that the legitimate interest is an opportunity, guaranteed to a lesser extent than the permitted behavior within a legal right or freedom. Legitimate interest is a mere permission, admitted by the state and to some extent supported by it. But legal right and freedom - are those means of regulation, which are directly approved and sanctioned by the state which presuppose duty of a person to a particular behavior. The author's vision of the specifity of legal enforcement of legitimate admissions is presented.

scholarly journals SYNCHRONIZATION OF PROCEDURAL AND FINANCIAL (BANKING) FUSE OF THE IMMUNITY OF PROPERTY RIGHTS

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (37) ◽  
pp. 503-509
Author(s):  
V. Kantsir ◽  
V. Kushpit ◽  
A. Palyukh ◽  
I. Tsylyuryk ◽  
I. Kantsir
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Social Reproduction ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Jel Classification ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Context ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Right ◽  
Judicial Protection

Abstract. The article is devoted to analysis of the effectiveness of the main procedural legal and financial (banking) mechanisms designed to ensure the protection of property rights’ immunity. The legally regulated procedures of such protection are analyzed on platforms — both procedural and legal as well as financial and economic. There is no doubt that only in a state where the immunity of property is declared and guaranteed to the person can be provided the development of economic, intellectual, socially oriented activities. The effect of the principle of immunity of property rights is not absolute, but its restrictions are possible only on the grounds and in the manner prescribed by law. The topicality of the inviolability of property rights is due to the role of law as a platform for citizens’ property independence and their participation in the processes of social reproduction. The guarantee of property independence is the right of ownership of property and non-property rights, which is realized by giving a person the right to freely, unimpededly, and fully exercise the rights of the owner of personal property. The compliance of the inviolability of property rights during criminal proceedings is not properly ensured in the current CPC (The Criminal Procedure Code) of Ukraine; in particular, the movement of confiscated property is not regulated, which questions the novelty of inviolability. To improve the procedure for the protection of property rights, this is necessary to regulate at the legislative level the mechanism of protection and restoration of property rights of persons victimized by criminal offenses. The etymology of «inviolability» guarantees by law the protection of the status of the person from any encroachment. Inviolability in the economic and legal context is mainly understood as a person’s legal status, which is an unalterable guarantee against unauthorized restrictions by the state institutions — law enforcement, financial, court, and individuals and legal entities. An attempt is made to accumulate most of the latest achievements (both legislative, theoretically investigative and applied) on the issues of legal regulation of the studied financial and legal relations, based on which scientific views are substantiated, and proposals are developed to improve regulations in this area. The main vectors of economic and legal mechanisms for the protection of the inviolability of property rights, which would correlate with generally accepted European and world standards, have been identified. Keywords: the inviolability of property rights, property rights, principles of proceedings, judicial protection, seizure of property, financial guarantee, financial risks. JEL Classification G28; К14 Formulas: 0; fig.: 0; tabl.: 0; bibl.: 12.

scholarly journals To the admissibility of the civil law exemption of property from arrest, imposed in the criminal proceedings: domestic and foreign experience

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 190-200
Author(s):  
Natalia Kashtanova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Judicial Protection

The subject of paper deals with the legal nature of measures of criminal procedural compulsionin the form of seizure of property.Methodological basis of the article is based on general scientific dialectical methods of cognitionof objective reality of the legal processes and phenomena that allowed us to conduct anobjective assessment of the state of legislation and law enforcement practice in the proceduralaspects of the cancellation of the seizure of property in criminal proceedings of Russia.The results and scope of it’s application. It is submitted that the cancellation of the seizureof the property (or the individual limit) is allowed only on the grounds and in the mannerprescribed by the criminal procedure law of the Russian Federation. However, the studyfound serious contradictions in the application of the relevant law. In particular, cases inwhich the question of exemption of property from arrest (exclusion from the inventory),imposed in the criminal case was resolved in a civil procedure that, in the opinion of theauthor of the publication, is extremely unacceptable.On the stated issues topics analyzes opinions of scientists who say that the dispute aboutthe release of impounded property may be allowed in civil proceedings, including pendingresolution of the criminal case on the merits. The author strongly disagrees with this positionand supports those experts who argue that the filing of a claim for exemption of propertyfrom arrest (exclusion from the inventory) the reviewed judicial act of imposing of arrestwithout recognition per se invalid. In this regard, the author cites the legal position ofthe constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, from which clearly follows that of theright of everyone to judicial protection does not imply the possibility of choice of the citizenat its discretion, techniques and procedures of judicial protection, since the features of suchjudicial protection is defined in specific Federal laws.The author analyzes and appreciates Kazakhstan's experience of legal regulation of the permissibilityof filing a civil claim for exemption of property from seizure imposed in criminalproceedings. The author notes that the new civil procedural legislation of the Republic ofKazakhstan, which came into force from 01 January 2016, clearly captures that considerationin the civil proceedings are not subject to claims for exemption of property from seizureby the criminal prosecution body.Conclusions. Necessity of amendment to article 422 of the Civil Procedure Code of Russia:this article should not apply to cases of application of measures of criminal procedural compulsionin the form of seizure of property. Among other things, the author proposed additionsto part 9 of article 115 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Russia.

The Environmental Resources of Rural People’s Farms

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judith Pallot ◽  
Tat'yana Nefedova
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
English Language ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Production Systems ◽  
Local Level ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Environmental Resources ◽  
Rural Settlements ◽  
Size Limits ◽  
Western View

In Fig. 4.1 we show diagrammatically the contrasting relationships and dependencies of rural households in the forested region of European Russia, north of Moscow and in the black earth steppe to the south. In this and the following chapters we analyse the various components making up these food production systems, beginning with the land. At the heart of personal subsidiary farming in rural Russia is the household plot or uchastok; the small parcel of land lying within the boundary of rural settlements on which rural dwellers may grow crops and construct outbuildings. Ever since the translation of Karl Wadekin’s (1973) seminal work, the uchastok has been referred to in English language literature as the ‘private plot’, and ‘personal subsidiary farming’ as ‘private farming’. The underlying conceit of the Western view, which it must be remembered grew out of the Cold War ideological battles between communism and market capitalism, was that the private plot was proof of the efficacy of individualism and private property over collectivism and social ownership. In reality, of course, household plots were not ‘private’ in the neoclassical understanding of property rights, since they could be neither bought nor sold (nor, indeed, was there much protection for their users from their alienation) and the food individuals produced did not originate exclusively from the plot but drew on other environmental resources, access to which was covered by a variety of often ill-defined rights and obligations. Since 1991, there have been some important improvements in property rights for the rural population. In particular, they have acquired title deeds to their plots (although there are size limits and their conveyance has to take place according to normative prices) and the use of other resources has, in some cases, been subject to legal regulation or (re)codified. At the local level, land use often remains governed more by custom than by the provisions of statutes and codes. It thus makes sense when discussing rural people’s access to resources to define ‘property rights’ broadly as a field of public claims and entitlements over a variety of resources, rather than as a bundle of clearly defined rights.

Likhetsprincipper i utlänkgslagstiftningen

1979 ◽  
Vol 48 (1-4) ◽  
pp. 201-209
Author(s):  
Lars D. Eriksson
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Political Participation ◽  
Central Body ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Nordic Countries ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
Political Asylum ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Political Refugees ◽  
Legal Right

Abstract1. Finland hosts today fewer refugees and other aliens than other Nordic countries, and the majority of the refugees are Chileans. This marked difference from the other Nordic countries is due to various factors: the geographical position on the fringe of Europe and on the border of the Soviet Union, economic problems and language difficulties. Finish law does not provide for a legal right of asylum, only for a legal possibility of asylum. Any claim for asylum is decided by administrative bodies with no recourse to pudicial remidies. 2. To a large extent aliens share the same rights as Finish citizens, but there are differences: a) The right to entry, sojourn and work are decided by administrative bodies, who apply a very restrictive policy. b) Aliens lack certain rights to political participation (Scandinavian aliens do however have such rights in this field), right to join the civil service, and there are serious limits to their right to process real estate and to carry on trade. c) The fact that there is no central administration of aliens affairs adds to this poor position of aliens. 3. Basically there is no differentation between refugees and other aliens. They share the same lack of procedual safeguards: Residence permit is given for 6 months or a year at a time, there is no right of appeal, decisions are not motivated. Refugees are given ordinary aliens passports and not a Convention Travel Document nor any documentation that they do in fact enjoy political asylum. There is no legal protection against refoulement. There is considerable doubt as to whether the agreement between Finland and the Soviet Union on co-operation against hijacking of airplanes of 1975, and the frontier agreement with the Soviet Union of 1960, leave an effective possibility of giving political asylum to people who fall under the two agreements. To sum up: There is in Finish law a differentiation between Scandinavians and other aliens, a potential but not necessarily a factual difference between ordinary aliens, and political refugees and finally a difference between political refugees from the Soviet Union and other political refugees. 4. Some proposals for improvement of the legal position of aliens: i) Aliens affairs should be separated from the police and should be handled by a central body with responsibility for social and economic as well as legal affairs. ii) After a while aliens should receive permanent residence and work permits. iii) Procedual guarantees should be reinforced in particular: contradiction, right of appeal, judicial remedies, legal council. iv) Administrative detention should be abolished. v) Full political participation at municipal and procincial level should be provided for. Particularly in relation to political refugees: i) Their affairs should be handled by a central body with responsibility for social affairs such as housing, teaching of language, work, information of legal rights and duties etc. ii) Refugee quotas according to the Swedish, Norwegian and Danish models should be adopted. iii) Refugees should be informed of the status when granted political asylum and issued convention travel documents. iv) Provisions on non-refoulement in accordance with international law should be established. v) Political asylum should be established as a legal right with procedual guarantees. Finally it is suggested to appoint a nordic ombudsman for refugees in co-operation with UNHCR.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document