Compensation for Infringement of Copyright and Related Rights: Essence and Primary Functions

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 34-40
Author(s):  
N. V. Buzova ◽  
◽  
R. L. Lukyanov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Comparative Law ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Legal Remedy ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
Exclusive Right

The Civil Code of the Russian Federation provides an opportunity to the rightholder in case of infringement of his exclusive copyright and related rights to demand in court instead of compensation for damages incurred by him to pay compensation. In most cases, when the rightholder applies for judicial protection of his violated rights, he requires the recovery of compensation. This article discusses the legal nature of compensation as a legal remedy of an exclusive right and its primary functions. When writing an article, a comparative law research method is used. As a result of the analysis of russian and foreign legislation, as well as judicial practice, it was found that compensation, in addition to restorative, also has a preventive function and can be considered an analogue of statutory damages.

scholarly journals An Object of Vindication: Problems of Law Enforcement

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 76-93
Author(s):  
A. A. Guseva
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Theory Of Law ◽  
Authorized Capital

The paper is devoted to examining objects of civil rights in order to establish whether it is possible to subject them to vindication. The paper analyzes such objects as things, “incorporeal things”, non-cash funds, uncertified securities, intellectual property, shares in the authorized capital of limited liability companies, digital rights, cryptocurrency, etc. The author determines the legal nature of the objects under consideration with due regard to the theory of law and legal stances of courts. As a consequence, the author substantiates the relativity of the possibility or impossibility of their vindication under Art. 301 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Also, the author examines the issues of existence of special mechanisms for protection of rights holders of uncertified securities and shares in the authorized capital of limited liability companies to find the interrelation between them and vindication. The paper provides the analysis of judicial practice on the issue of claiming civil law objects from someone else’s illegal possession. Conclusions are drawn as to which objects can be subject to vindication under Art. 301 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, which objects can be claimed by analogy of the law and which objects cannot be subjected to vindication.

scholarly journals Concerning the Legal Nature of Notifications About the Use of Budgetary Enforcement Measures

2019 ◽  
pp. 49-58
Author(s):  
Dmitrii Vyacheslavovich Karpukhin ◽  
Alexander Vladimirovich Ostroushko
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Comparative Law ◽  
Dual Nature ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Legal Studies ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Russian Federation

The object of the research is codification of budgetary relations arising in the process of implementation of budgetary enforcement measures. In 2013 the Budgetary Code of the Russian Federation offered a completely new two-level administrative procedure construction that implied fixation of the grounds for implementation of budgetary enforcement measures in notifications about the use of budgetary enforcement measures and decisions that such measures shall be applied. Analysis of the law enforcement practice of using the aforesaid budgetary enforcement measures has demonstrated that there is a problem defining the legal nature of notifications about the use of budgetary enforcement measures. The research is based on the combination of general and special research methods used in social and legal studies. The methodological basis of the research includes the dialectical method with typical requirements of objectivity, versatility, historicism and specificity of truth. General research methods used by the researcher include analysis, synthesis, comparison and measurement. The special research method is the comparative law analysis. As a result of the research, the author discovers that the problem of defining the legal nature of notifications about the use of budgetary enforcement measures is caused by the two-level law enforcement construction of budgetary enforcement measures that implies both notifications and decisions about application of budgetary enfrocement measures. The researcher also underlines the dual nature of notifications that, besides fixation of the grounds for implementation of budgetary enforcement measures and stating the amount of funds that have been used violating the limits of interbudgetary transfers, budget credict or have been used not for intended purpose, also contains instructions about making relevant decisions. 

SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT IN THE SYSTEM OF PRIVATE LAW

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 7-107
Author(s):  
M.D. TYAZHBIN
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Law Reform ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article is dedicated to the category of subordination agreements. Based on the concept of conflict of rights in personam, the author makes an attempt to integrate this category into the system of private law, to determine the legal nature of subordination, and from these positions to assess the effectiveness of Art. 309.1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, implemented in the course of the civil law reform.

Scientific Commentary on the Review of Judicial Practice on Some Issues of the Application of Legislation on Business Entities

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 27-32
Author(s):  
V. K. Andreev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Business Entities ◽  
Law Making

The article discusses the forms of clarification on matters of judicial practice by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the Presidium of the Supreme Court, as well as in the Review of judicial practice on some issues of the application of legislation on business companies dated December 25, 2019. Clarifications of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on issues of judicial practice are characterized as the positions of the courts identified in the course of studying and summarizing the judicial practice of the corresponding category of cases, which are acts of individual regulation of public relations. Focusing on Art. 6 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and Section 6, Art. 12 of the APC RF shows the validity of dividing wrong into two types of wrong: the «moderate» type of «judicial law-making and the position of the court» and the «radical» type of «judicial law-making», when the court develops the rule of law, which contradicts the constitutional principle of separation of powers. When resolving corporate disputes, it is necessary to investigate whether the charter of a non-public company does not contain the rights and obligations of its participants, which they themselves created by making a unanimous decision and including them in the charter of the company (paragraph 3 of Art. 66.3 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, paragraph 3 of Art. 14 of the Law about LLC).

To the Matter of Procedural and Legal Problems of Detaining a Person on Suspicion of Committing a Crime

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
E.V. Bolshakov ◽  
◽  
I.D. Nazarov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Moment

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.

THE LIMITS OF EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS TO COMPUTER PROGRAMS

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 88-133
Author(s):  
A.S. VOROZHEVICH
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Balance Sheet ◽  
Computer Programs ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Fair Use ◽  
Traditional Concept ◽  
Specific Object ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Exclusive Right

In the article, the author examines time, content and object boundaries of exclusive rights to computer programs. It has been substantiated that the meaningful boundaries of exclusive rights should be established through a closed list of cases of free use. At the same time, the balance sheet doctrine of fair use, supplemented by the concepts of “transformative use”, cannot serve as a tool for establishing such boundaries. At the same time, in order to resolve atypical conflicts of interest arising in relation to a specific object of copyright between a person interested in access to such an object and the rightholder, standards for assessing the behavior of the rightholder should be developed – special (in relation to Article 10 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation) limits for the implementation of exclusive right. With regard to the object boundaries of rights to computer programs, it was concluded that they are established by means of the “traditional” concept of copyright “protected form – unprotected content” and the doctrine of “essential part”. The principle of exhaustion of rights should not apply to such objects.

scholarly journals CONTRACTUAL BASIS FOR TERMINATION OF CIVIL LEGAL OBLIGATIONS: PROBLEMS OF THEORY AND PRACTICE OF APPLICATION

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (6) ◽  
pp. 1054-1058
Author(s):  
N.V. Kuznetsova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Freedom Of Contract ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Legal Obligations ◽  
Problematic Issue ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article considers contractual grounds for termination of civil obligations: compensation, innovation, debt forgiveness. The paper notes some problems of the application of Articles 409, 414, 415 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation in judicial practice, analyzes the issues of the ratio of compensation and innovation, the differentiation of these contracts. The problems of qualification of agreements on the grounds for termination of obligations in law enforcement practice and the question of applying the principle of freedom of contract to the relations under consideration are considered. It is noted that at present the practice of applying the legislation on compensation has changed significantly. Despite the restrictions established by the norm of Article 409 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, judicial practice allows the possibility of using works and services as a subject of compensation, which leads to problems of distinguishing such contractual grounds for termination of obligations as compensation and innovation. With regard to the innovation, an analysis of the provisions on the possibility of novating the penalty into a loan obligation is given. A problematic issue is the legal qualification of debt forgiveness as a basis for termination of an obligation. It is noted that the contractual nature of debt forgiveness should be taken into account. Acceptance of notification by the debtor's creditor of his release from the performance of his duty is the silence of the debtor (clause 2 of Article 438 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). The article also considers the question of the ratio of debt forgiveness and donation. The analysis of judicial practice shows that the courts do not consider debt forgiveness as a gift, except in cases when the creditor released the debtor from the performance of the obligation free of charge. In this case, the norms of Article 168 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and paragraph 4 of Article 575 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation are subject to the application of debt forgiveness.

scholarly journals NOVELTIES OF PART III OF THE CIVIL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION: ISSUES AND SOLUTIONS

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 20-23
Author(s):  
Tatyana L. Kalacheva ◽  
◽  
Natalya S. Makharadze ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Legal Institutions ◽  
Inheritance Law ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Creation

The article examines new legal institutions of inheritance law, which are legal institutions associated with the creation and operation of the inheritance fund, the execution of a joint will and the conclusion of an inheritance contract. The authors determine the prospects for their relevance, problematic aspects, ways to solve them, analyzing examples of judicial practice.

scholarly journals Responsibility of Individuals Managing a Legal Entity

Lex Russica ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 30-38
Author(s):  
Yu. A. Meteleva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Causal Link ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
Legal Entity ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
The Russian Federation

The problem of liability of persons managing a legal entity was raised in Russian civil law after the adoption of legislation on joint-stock companies. At the beginning, it was more theoretical in nature, since the civil legislation did not contain any mechanisms for the implementation of such liability. To date, due to the reform of the Civil Code and changing approaches in jurisprudence, disputes concerning property liability of directors have formed a considerable category of cases. The paper analyzes the elements of such civil wrongs as damage caused to a legal entity by persons who are members of the managerial boards and are able to exercise a significant impact on such boards. All elements of the civil wrong under consideration are being analyzed: the act, the consequences (damage), the causal link between the act and the consequences, and the fault of the wrong-doer. The paper also elucidates the participants involved in such disputes. Exploring specific court cases, the author shows which acts of directors are recognized by the courts as illegal, what restrictions are expressed in the legal standings of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation to qualify as illegal different acts of directors and other persons. In the vast majority of cases of this category, persons exercising the functions of the sole executive body are prosecuted. Sometimes they are also the participants at the same time. The scope of persons covered by the term “determining the acts of a legal entity” is not defined in the law, which also hampers judicial practice. Judicial proceedings bringing such persons to justice are exceptional. Therefore, the author proposes to define in the Civil Code all persons who can commit an act and thereby cause damage to a legal entity. In addition, it is proposed to establish criteria of unreasonableness and dishonesty of actions of directors and other persons.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document