The article discusses the calculating losses’ elements in the criminal code, their development and significance today. These elements are widespread practice in defining economic crimes. There are some general problems with defining their substance and methodic of their calculation. Basically, they use as a tool for creating aggravating circumstances with regard to economic crimes, so they are designed as a workable mechanism of inflicting the punishment. However, the empirical data shows that there are either disbalance in penalization (that is number of convicted for crime with aggravating element of such type is more than number of convicted for a “simple” crime) or disbalance in application of punishment. Using as an example a fraud in especially gross size, it may be shown that there is not any clear impact of size of stolen property on applied punishment. The historical research shows that in Empire’s era calculating losses’ elements were not widespread in the criminal code. In Soviet time, such elements were used more and more. Up to the late 1980s, some of such elements were approximately defined in case law; however, the most part of these elements were not clearly defined either in case law or in scholar publications. To improve the effectiveness of calculating losses’ elements, the author proposes some steps de lege ferenda. The main step would be calculating losses with regard to economic status of the victim that is using diminishing of company’s actives in percentage as a threshold. The second step would be limiting use of calculating losses’ elements in criminal legislation.
Judicial expenses became subject to the Plenary Resolution of the Supreme Court for the first time. The author attempts to find in the explanations of the Supreme Court any leading idea or general principle which would allow to cover all proposed explanations. The interpretations put by the Supreme Court are analysed in the context of various theories defining the nature of court costs: the procedural theory, the theory of damages, and the theory of the actual procedural behavior.
In this article the directions of reforming of the market of legal services in questions of lawyer monopoly on representation of interests of the principal in courts, introduction of standardization and improvement of quality of the rendered services are considered. Having analyzed the volumes and other characteristics of the market of legal services of the Russian Federation, the author identified and argued the need for measures, the complex implementation of which will achieve the goals and significantly improve the quality of legal services. The author proposes the creation of a mechanism to guarantee the confidentiality of the client, increasing the availability of legal aid to citizens, improving the quality of legal aid by improving the professional level, the creation of normative and professional standards governing the activities of market participants.
The article provides a brief historical and analytical review of the recent changes in Canon Law during thePopeFranciscus pontificate, considering first of all the most important changes in canon law of marriage and canon law of sanctions in the Church.
Nowadays economic sanctions represent one of the most popular mechanism of non-forcible coercion and exercising pressure on states. This phenomenon generates systemic challenges for national sovereignty, economic security, macroeconomic stability and sustainability. The logical response to the sanctions’ constraints is the creation of a protective legal mechanism allowing to minimise negative consequences of sanctions and effectively resist them. The development of the Russian legislation and ongoing experts’ discussions illustrate that such mechanism is now at its active stage of formation. In the present article we make an attempt to systematise different “anti-sanction” measures, consider their nature and analyse possible ways of improvement and further development. To counter threats caused by sanctions, the Russian authorities are pursuing several interrelated goals, including: (1) demotivating and increasing the costs of economic sanctions for sanctioning states, (2) minimisation of the existing negative effect for the Russian economy and business entities, (3) reducing dependence on sanctioning states in critical sectors of the Russian economy, as well as increasing overall resilience to sanctions’ restrictions. Each of these tasks implies implementation of a set of measures that are considered in this article. At the same time, despite the existing positive results, the Russian anti-sanction mechanism has its own drawbacks of systemic nature, namely, the lack of a comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of the measures taken, significant gaps in the regulation and administration of the “counter-sanctions”, as well as insufficient use of the potential of international law to resist economic sanctions.
The article presents the results of the assessment of domestic civil law and legal consciousness of Russian lawyers from the standpoint of a functional approach to law. This first theoretical part considers historical roots of dogmatism in Russian legal consciousness and shows that dogmatism, which is closely connected with the super positivist approach to law, is still imprinted in the minds of domestic civilists. The functional approach to law is described as a necessary addition to legal dogmatism and an opposition to positivism, as well as the essence of the social impact of law. These theses are empirically confirmed in the second part of the paper. The author considers the principle of good faith, standards of proof, protection of possession, recovery of damages, compensation for harm to life and health, etc., and proves that in these key areas of civil law the dogmatic approach still prevails or significantly hinders the effective operation of such civil law instruments.
The article provides continuation of a study on the assessment of Russian civil law and legal awareness of Russian jurists from the standpoint of a functional approach to law. In the first part of the study, the main theoretical implications of the functional approach to Russian civil law were examined. Here the theses expressed in the first part are confirmed empirically. The material constituting the empirical part of the study consists of several episodes from the life of modern Russian civil law. This article presents three of such episodes - the supremacy of the Civil Code, the principle of good faith and unfair contract terms.
This article continues the cycle, which presents the results of the research into the assessment of domestic civil law and legal consciousness of national lawyers from the perspective of the functional approach to law. The first paper of the cycle considered the main theoretical results, so now these results are empirically confirmed. The empirical part consists of several episodes illustrating the life of modern domestic civil law. Three of them (the supremacy of the Civil Code, the principle of good faith, and unfair conditions of contracts) were addressed in the second article. This third article adds three more episodes: protection of possession, principles of regulation of real estate transactions, and the problem of recovering damages for contractual breach.
This is the concluding article in the series devoted to the assessment of Russian civil law and legal consciousness of Russian lawyers from the perspective of the functional approach to law. The first publication considered the main theoretical findings, while subsequent articles confirmed these findings empirically. The empirical material consists of several episodes discovering the life of modern Russian civil law. Six of them (Civil Code Supremacy, Principle of Good Faith, Unfair Contract Terms, Protection of Ownership, Principles of Real Estate Turnover Regulation, Collection of Damages) were considered in the previous articles. This article explores the standards of proof as a follow-up on the recovery of damages and compensation for harm caused to life and health.
In the present article author analyses the key problems of the development of the international justice in conjunction with international law and policy. Using the European Court of Human Rights as example, he demonstrates the trend of development of international jurisdictional bodies. Upon author’s view, the balanced development of the international law as well as the vitality of the existing mechanisms of the international protection of human rights are impossible in the absence of the effective dialogue between national and supranational courts.
The Article is concerned with recent history of relations between Russia and the Rome Statute. Such history began in the 1990s, during the preparatory stages for the Statute’s enactment, and officially ended in 2016. During this period of time, there were changing attitudes to the Statute, attempts to ratify it, proposals to change national legislation with regard to international crimes. The author concentrates on official positions as to the Statute and connected scholar and political views. The main assumption proposed in the Article is that the relations with the Statute (and of course with the International Criminal Court) were subject for political considerations. There were no significant legal and public discussion as to its ratification, implementation or rejection. Despite the formal rejection of the Statute to this moment, it surely will influence at least scholar discussion on international criminal law matters in the future.