К вопросу об абстрактной модели передачи прав требования
The article examines an abstract model of assignment of claims in comparison with causal one. The authors analyze strong and weak points of both systems and come to a conclusion that the abstract system of transfer is preferable.
The article focuses on the issues of systemacity in language, the category of causation, functioning of causatives of the informative-modificative class. In this article causation is examined from the perspective of functional approach, suggested by A. Bondarko. A verb of causative semantics is related to a more general class on the basis of its essential properties. In the centre of our attention is a lexical causative of interpersonal semantics which is the core of the functional-semantic field of causation.
The article covers the main characteristic of cession of future claims as a legal act and its place in the system of legal acts. The author considers assignment of future claims as a disposal transaction with an object which does not exist at the moment.
The article is devoted to non-ordinary cases of causation in criminal law. The author starts with the critical review of general theories and blames them for their ineffectiveness in dealing with specific cases connected with the multiplicity of causes, victim’s condition, intervention of other actors. All these cases are divided into three groups, namely ‘aggregate causality’, ‘atypical causality’ and ‘intervening causality’. With regard to each group there are formulated general rules of imputation of liability based primarily on idea of conditio sine qua non and limitation of liability. The author reveals the interaction between different modes of causation i.e. transformation of ‘aggregate causality’ into ‘intervening causality’. Review of case law allows to formulate clear rules of imputation of liability distilled from philosophical and theoretical overburdened constructs. With regard to various specific types of non-ordinary causation, there are proposed as possible different approaches based either on strict adherence to objective view on causation and limitation of liability as a consequence or on more flexible approach allowing imputation of liability in morally and socially blameworthy cases. Theory and practice of common law and continental law systems are also widely used as a supporting basis for some propositions. The article concludes with proposed general rule. However, this general rule may be subjected to further clarifications and exemptions. The author also urges not to try to elaborate in future the general theory of causation applicable to the whole body of criminal law. Instead it is expected development of special rules much needed in real practice.