The article offers a short analysis of a recent initiative of the Bank of Russia, namely “passports” of the financial products as a part of the wider campaign on improvement of the informing of the investors and consumers on the banking products. Based on the empyrical analysis of the situation in the Russian baniing system and taking into consideration the international approaches the author puts forward a number of critical considerations.
This article examines one of the topical issues in Russian tax law, namely the definition of forfeit under current Russian legislation on taxes and charges. It analyses a radical transformation in the legal nature of forfeit from the sanction for tax noncompliance (in the 1990s) to the means of securing payment of tax liability (upon enactment of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation in 1999). The research identifies the reasons behind this alteration and assesses their impact on balancing the public and the private interest in tax law. It reviews amended rules for forfeit calculations as applied to both companies and individuals. The new method of corporate tax arrears calculations disfavours long delays in tax payments. The changes that took place in 2017 in the system of public finance management and the creation of a single fiscal channel in Russia that combined taxes, customs payments and insurance contributions make it necessary to take a fresh look at the relationship between securing fulfilment of tax obligations and securing payment of customs duties and taxes in accordance with the customs legislation of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). A comparative method is used to look at the means of securing payment of customs duties and approaches to defining the forfeit being charged as late payment interest on customs duties and taxes across EAEU member states.
Often, after a court has made a decision on a case, a decision of the Constitutional Court is adopted, in which the legal norm, which is the basis of its decision by an ordinary court, is recognized as unconstitutional, or it is given a constitutional interpretation other than that which was guided by an ordinary court. In this case, can this court decision be reviewed in the appeal, cassation, supervisory procedure and on new circumstances on the grounds that it contradicts the position of the Constitutional Court? The article deals with the questions of whether such a discrepancy of positions is an error of an ordinary court, how it can be qualified, whether competition in this case is possible between cassation, supervisory proceedings and the revision of judicial acts on new circumstances, what are the limits for giving retroactive effect to the decision of the Constitutional Court. The ideas outlined in the article make it possible to assess the latest changes in the legislation on constitutional proceedings, which are also analyzed in the work from a procedural point of view.
The author offers a series of complex proposals for the development of regulation of credit rating agencies (CRA) in Russia, taking into account the high degree of monopolisation of the relevant markets, analysing relevant EU and US regulations, new Russian law as well as first Russian Central Bank’s regulations implementing the latter. The author focuses on such groups of questions as: prohibited and manageable conflicts of interest; prices oversight; permissible activities for credit rating agencies; fair competition, entry of new players into the market and the prevention of monopolisation of the market; oversight CRA and other financial markets institutions salaries; supervision fees; peculiarities of sovereign ratings; sanctions applied to the CRA. According to the author, international cooperation of the regulators of CRA markets as well as competition authorities of the BRICS countries will help to restart the CRA market in the direction of ensuring the integrity and transparency of their work.
This paper discusses one of the instruments of deregulation — “regulatory guillotine”. The “guillotine” implementation within Russia is observed in the context of international experience and limited institutional opportunities for reforms in the modern Russian Federation. The article shows that the initial ambivalent design of the reform put Russian leadership in the beginning of 2021 in a position where they had to complete it without achieving economically significant results, or to recognize the need to pursue the reform on the long way (until 2024–2025). It is proposed to consider steps to encourage regulators and stakeholders to promote an evidence-based lawmaking and introduce the systematic training for current and future public officials.
The article deals with the psychological aspects of constitutional litiagation in Russia and worldwide. The author tries to find out how the political and legal philosophy of judges of constitutional and equivalent courts manifests itself in judicial dissent. Factors arising as the case progresses and potentially affecting the initial ideas of constitutional judges are analysed. Legalistic, attitude and strategic approaches, which are three main methods to assess judicial behaviour recognised in Western psychological science, are highlighted. The concept of psychological attitude is introduced as it applies to court proceedings, and its role in court decision making is demonstrated through concrete examples. With the help of the analysis of judicial dissent, the author reveals stable nature of the legal views of judges of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, which approximately allows to predict their position in similar cases. At the same time, the values and specificity of the arguments laid down in the dissenting opinions and the stylistics of their presentation are taken into account. The conclusion is made that, under the current circumstances, judicial dissent is a suitable opportunity for judges to express their views publicly in relation to a specific case which has caused discrepancies within the panel.
The article deals with the current issues of ‘freedom of contract’, a fundamental private-law doctrine, which were brought into focus by the Ruling of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court #16 ‘On the freedom of contracts and its limitations’. The author argues that the S.A.C. view on the administration of this doctrine, as presented in the Ruling, is poorly compatible with some basic concepts of private-law legislature and legal text interpretation, as well as with the theory of separation of powers. It will cause a traumatic effect on sustainability of individual rights of a less powerful party, e.g. those of the customer.
An overview of legal news related mainly to the coronavirus pandemic is provided. The following topics are considered: checking the legal system for strength; anti-virus law-making and grounds for restricting civil rights in Russia in the context of emergency events; introduction of "non-working days" with the preservation of wages; state measures to support the economy; distribution of responsibility of Federal and regional authorities; introduction of restrictive measures (especially in the city of Moscow) ; changes in legislation on the introduction of high-alert and emergency regimes, as well as repressive measures; changes in the work of courts; the St. Petersburg international legal forum online under the slogan Rule of Corona; the first judicial practice for violating bans imposed in connection with the epidemic, including for "fake news"; the Kotov case and virtual rallies; the positions of the Russian armed forces in the Review of the application of anti-virus legislation.
This article deals with peculiarities of the legal regime of treas- ury shares and issues related to their legal fate. The author gives special attention to the identification and analysis of those problems that arise in connection with the realisation by a company of its shares and offers possible solutions thereof. The author comes to the conclusion that shareholders of a pub- lic company should enjoy a pre-emptive right of purchasing shares, which are realised by the public company to the public, in proportion to a number of shares of the relevant category (type) belonging to each of them. Additionally, the realisation by a public company of treasury shares should be allowed only for specified purposes and be accompanied by the disclosure of information on a transaction and its purpose. Any transac- tion involving realisation by the company of treasury shares in favour of a particular person needs preliminary consent from the company’s general meeting of shareholders.