L’enlèvement d’enfants : perspectives européenne et russe
This article aims to present in a comparative perspective, Russian and European ways of dealing with international child abduction. Every EU countries, as well as Russia are all party to The 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The implementation of this text, however, raises many institutional and substantial difficulties, that need to be addressed.
The paper looks at wrongful removal and wrongful retention – two types of child abduction identified by the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction of 1980 (Russia has become its member in 2011). The author explains the difference between these concepts and the reasons why it is important to accurately fix the date of the wrongful removal (retention). The author also focuses on the major component of wrongful removal (retention), which is a consent of a person (parent) from whom the child has been presumably abducted to the child’s removal (retention). If a parent does not make any objections, neither removal nor retention can be seen as child abduction. The paper also presents a brief analysis of the Neustadt case defined by English courts as “the anatomy of an abduction”.
This paper analyzes the relations between two international instruments aimed at child protection: the 1980 Hague Convention on civil aspects of international child abduction and the 1996 Hague Convention on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition, enforcement and co-operation in respect of parental responsibility and measure for the protection of children. The paper focuses on the issues related to the possibility of returning of a child removed or retained by one his or her parents to another parent to the place of child’s habitual residence under either of these Conventions.
The paper explains the reasons that led to Russia's assession to the 1980 Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of International Chid Abduction and the 1996 Hague Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Co-operation in respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children and analyses application of the 1996 Convention using the "Neustadt case" as an example.
The article is devoted to a particular form of freedom of assembly — the right to counter-demonstrate. The author underlines the value of this right as an element of democratic society, but also acknowledges the risk of violent actions among participants of opposing demonstrations. Due to this risk, the government may adopt adequate measures restricting the right to counter-demonstrate, certain types of which are analyzed in this paper.
Development of standards of international controllability is reviewed in the article. Institutional approach is applied to development of international legal regime of Energy Charter. Definition of controllability is connected to development of international standards of dispute settlement, which are described in the article in detail. In connection with controllability, Russian interest, defense of investment in European Union and ecological investment encouragement, is reviewed in the article.
мировое управление и управляемость, Мировая экономика, международное экономическое право, энергетическая хартия, International control and controllability, International economics, international economic law, Energy Charter
международное частное право; недвижимость; ; школа бартолистов; бартолисты; теория статутов; статуарная теория/