Expert commentary on judicial and procedural reforms.
The article analyzes the problems of reforming public (state and municipal) financial control, which is taking place at the present stage of the Russian state's existence. The Central phenomenon that the analysis focuses on is a risk-based approach to the organization of public financial control and its modernization in the context of digitalization of the public Finance sphere. The problem that permeates this study is to identify and analyze the positive and negative aspects of using a risk-based approach in the context of the transformation of public financial control.
From the above-mentioned research goal, we can distinguish a certain number of fundamental tasks that need to be solved by studying the above-mentioned problems. One of these tasks is the need to study a digital model of a risk-based approach to control activities, which is just beginning to be applied by regulatory authorities. Another important task is to identify and research new (digital) tools and technologies applied in the use of a risk-based approach in public financial control.
In this study, the following research methods were used, in particular: the formal-dogmatic method was used to study and analyze the legal norms governing the use of a risk-based approach to control activities; the method of legal forecasting was used to determine the possible further development of this approach and its modification due to the impact of the processes of digitalization of state control on it.
On the basis of the analysis the conclusions about the presence of positive and negative aspects of the updated risk-based approach model are made, and the impact of digitalization on changes affecting the organizational and legal mechanisms of public financial control is shown. In addition, forecasts are made regarding the further development of a risk-based approach to the organization of control activities in the field of public Finance, which may occur due to the further digitalization of the main state institutions.
This article is devoted to the study of the most topical issues in the regulation of the creation and operation of international payment systems. The author analyses the monitoring procedure for international payment systems, which, as a rule, is carried out by the central bank of the country where the payment system is incorporated, paying particular attention to the life cycle of the payment in the system and the moment of fulfillment of mutual obligations by participants in the system, the payment system’s contractual framework essential for mutual rights and obligations of all participants, lien issues, as well as the correlation between the legal infrastructure of the international payment system and payment technology.
The constitutional rule of admissibility of evidence requires the establishment in the procedural law of an exclusive list (numerus clausus) of means of proof. This creates a system of rules, following which the court and other participants in the process are entitled to extract information from the source; the violation of such rules leads to a ban on using this evidence. Owing to the principle of spontaneity having the constitutional basis «other documents and materials» from which the court can't independently isolate information can't act as an independent evidentiary fact. The availability of a non-exclusive list of means of proof, and the list of means of evidence makes open the presence in it of «other documents and materials», by which you can mean anything, allows the participants in the process to submit to the court any data that destroys the system of admissibility of evidence.
The article explores how the concept of “subjective-public right”, reformulated by G. Ellinek and other distinguished scholars at the end of the 19th century, is reflected in the latest Moscow district courts’ practice, especially in the cases based on the chapter 25 “Proceedings in cases on challenging of decisions made, actions (inaction) fulfilled by state authorities” of the Civil Procedural Code of the Russian Federation. The courts are now changing under the influence of citizens being aware of their subjective-public rights and insisting the court to protect them. Author critically assesses the popular principle of the uniformity of judicial practice and alternatively proposes the doctrine of territoriality as well as “vernacular” analysis of judicial acts.
This article is devoted to consideration of the last changes of Art. 222 of the Сivil code of the Russian Federation about unauthorized constructions. The authors assess the novels by analyzing such key problems of the institution of unauthorized construction as adequacy of sanctions for unauthorized construction; recognition of unauthorized construction on «formal» grounds and protection of a bona fide developer; administrative demolition of unauthorized constructions. As a result of the assessment, the authors concluded that the latest changes in the regulation of unauthorized constructions are valid; however, they do not resolve all existing problems in practice.