Преюдиция в правовом механизме защиты прав хозяйствующих субъектов
Article is devoted institute of the prejudice which is considered as an element of the difficult mechanism of protection of the rights of business subjects. The author on the basis of the analysis of the constitutional positions, allocation of ultimate fact in different processes, statements of remedial theoretical positions makes offers on the further fastening of the given institute and perfection of the penal procedure law.
Prejudices legitimize the discrimination against groups by declaring them to be of unequal, especially of less, worth. This legitimizing power is highly relevant in social conflicts of modern societies that are governed by market-oriented value systems. However, prejudice research has yet to be linked to sociological discourses on the marketization of society. We argue that Institutional Anomie Theory (IAT), a theory originally developed to explain crime rates, offers a fruitful macro-sociological framework for a better understanding of micro-social prejudices that emerge along with processes of marketization. Extending IAT to explain prejudices in a German study based on survey data offers a first attempt to underpin our theoretical hypotheses with empirical data. Although the results need to be interpreted with due caution, they suggest that the extended IAT model can be usefully applied to explain how a marketized mentality is related to different forms of institutional integration, and how it is conducive to specific prejudices that emerge in market-dominated societies against purported economically burdening social groups.
This paper is primarily focused on issues of the participation of city residents as interveners in Russian commercial proceedings. The article explores how such issues are reflected in the latest courts’ practice, especially on the cases based on the chapter 24 “Proceedings in cases on challenging of decisions made, actions (inaction) fulfilled by state authorities” of the Code of Commercial Procedure of Russian Federation.
The author critically assesses a practice of courts’ refusal to allow city residents to intervene to the proceedings against the Federal Service for State Registration, Cadastre and Cartography (Rosreestr) and emphasizes that city residents should be permitted to intervene to protect their rights and interests.
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/