Разъяснения Верховного Суда по вопросам применения законодательства о возмещении издержек, связанных с рассмотрением дела, в контексте учения о процессуальных расходах
Judicial expenses became subject to the Plenary Resolution of the Supreme Court for the first time. The author attempts to find in the explanations of the Supreme Court any leading idea or general principle which would allow to cover all proposed explanations. The interpretations put by the Supreme Court are analysed in the context of various theories defining the nature of court costs: the procedural theory, the theory of damages, and the theory of the actual procedural behavior.
The key point of this article is comparative analysis of the Russian and USA national laws, the provision dealing with recovery statutory damages. The two basic aims of this form of liability are:
1) to give the courts specific unambiguous directions concerning monetary awards, thus avoiding the confusion and uncertainty and, at the same time,
2) to provide the courts with reasonable latitude to adjust recovery to the circumstances of the case, thus avoiding some of the artificial or overly technical difficulties.
The article also includes the review “fair use” as a special principle of liability.
The article concerns interesting and important issues of compensation for harm caused by illegal actions of administrative bodies. The article focuses on the current aspect of the issue. The paper proposes necessary amendments to the legislation related to the issues raised in the article. In particular, the paper proposes amendments to the legislation, for example the supplement of Art. 2 in the Law of the Russian Federation from 27.04.1993 N 4866-1 On appealing against the actions and decisions violating the rights and freedoms of citizens’ may be supplied with the provision that citizens have the right to file application for damages or losses caused by illegal actions of administrative bodies in the event of denial letter regarding the implementation of pre-court dispute resolution by an official. The author also proposed to supply Art. 6 of the Law of the Russian Federation from 27.04.1993 N 4866-1 On appealing against the actions and decisions violating the rights and freedoms of citizens with the provision under which in cases established by law, when considering a complaint for damages (harm)caused by unlawful actions (inaction) of an official, court must take into account the obligation to complywith the order of pre-trial dispute resolution procedure for damages (harm) to a maximum of 100,000 roubles. Russian law 27.04.1993 N 4866-1 On appealing against the actions and decisions violating the rights and freedoms of citizens may include a rule under which unlawful conduct of an official who would not pay damages shall responsible. The author shows the necessity of the changes in the Arbitrazh and Civil procedural Codes of the Russian Federation, the Russian Code of Civil Procedure concerning the cases when an appropriate subject doe s not voluntarily pay the damages caused by unlawful actions (inaction) of officials, the amount to be raised through the courts, can be increased. The author concluded that legislation should encourage compensation in administrative procedure, as opposed to large financial costs in the courts.
This paper is primarily focused about how to resolve a case under the article 146 of the Civil procedural code of the Russian Federation when the defendant seeks a relief after an interlocutory injunction has been successfully applied against him. The article explores how such problems are reflected in the latest courts’ practice, especially on the complex cases of mixed procedure. The author critically assesses the possibility of a situation when the defendant asks the plaintiff to be excessively punished for his requests and emphasizes the doctrine of "a chilling effect": the discouragement of the legitimate exercise of a legal right by the threat of a legal sanction.
международное частное право; недвижимость; ; школа бартолистов; бартолисты; теория статутов; статуарная теория/
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