Нормы и нормативные системы в философии, праве и информатике
This article gives an account of the international symposium «Norms and Normative Systems in Philosophy, Law, and Informatics — 2011», the authors describe the most important aspects of the symposium and summarize the key points of the main presentations made at the symposium.
In this book are collected the principal works of the Argentinian legal philosophers Carlos Alchourron and Eugenio Bulygin on the legal philosophy, logic of norms, and on the theoretical problems of the normative analysis of law
Arguing about the juridical nature of the decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, taken in particular constitutional review, the author of this article concludes that the acts in question constitute a normative interpretation case law, equal in their legal power to forceverifiable the rules and have in some cases retroactive.
The article examines the role of an abstract interpretation of acts of the highest courts in the context of the unity of judicial enforcement, due to the need to implement the constitutional prohibition of discrimination enshrined in the administration of justice. Arguing about the validity of acts of abstract interpretation, the author concludes that their binding may be deemed constitutionally justified only if the current system of legal regulation in the mechanism of denial of constitutional jurisdiction.
In this paper the differences and the similarities of formation of legal traditions in the Medieval Europe are examined. The author analyzes the impact of these differences on the consequent development of legal mentality and legal identity in Russia and in the Western Europe.
This paper characterizes importance and the principal possibilities of application of the theory of normative systems to the problems of legal theory and of logic of norms.
In this article are discussed the limits of application of general theory of systems in legal science. The author criticizes utilization of the notion «systemacity» for description of how legal norms are organized and how legal phenomena are structured. In author’s opinion, the term «system» is charged with a multiplicity of meanings, so that in social sciences this term is sometimes applied for characterization of the fundamentally different phenomena and realities. That is why legal scientists shall be especially careful in using this term. In the Russian jurisprudence the term «system» is applied for both «social reality of law» and for a set of the norms belonging to the positive law of the country. This use is tautological and has no conceptual justification. The author proposes to use the term «legal order» only for description of a structured set of legal rules, reserving the use of «system» for characterization of law from the point of view of comparative jurisprudence, legal sociology and other sciences which examine the relations between the law and other sectors of social reality. Argumentation in favor of «systemacity» of law is theoretically based on philosophy of objectivism. It results in vain illusions about a capacity of norms to produce themselves a legal order which emerges automatically insomuch as law is a functional entity. But this «systemacity» is not given in (the) law a priori. Logical coherence and consistence of norms always remain relative, being the outcome of the purposeful activity of lawmakers, judges, legal scholars. It is naïve to suppose that rules can enter into the law and find their adequate position there without human intervention. Such understanding can lead to apology of irresponsibility of those who create redundant and inconsistent norms in the false hope that these norms will anyways find their place in the law grace to «systemacity» of this latter.
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/