In this article are analyzed the event of the International legal philosophy symposium “Rationality in law”. Author’s attention is focused on description of the main theses of the presentations made at the symposium. As to M. Antonov’s presentation the author stresses importance of analysis of the arguments in favor of unity of law that have been postulated in the history of legal philosophy and which have been often based on different versions of holism. In L. Clerico presentation it is underscored that the conception of weighting of principles elaborated by the contemporary German philosopher Robert Alexy is applicable in the realm of constitutional law. The presentation of P. Chiassoni was remarkable through its division between three kinds of truth: formal truth as correspondence of reasoning to laws of logic; instrumental truth as applicability of means for obtaining of certain goals; essential truth as selection of highest ethical values and relations between them. The report of R. Caracciolo was devoted to the problem of correlation between the binding force of norms and the persuasive force of reasons for action. J. Moreso analyzed the applicability of classical logic in the world of law and how laws of logic work in legal order. M. Farrell proposed an interesting reconstruction of the legal philosophy of Jeremy Bentham in the light of his project of codification and restructuring of the judicial system of England. In J. Rodriguez’s presentation were compared the differences between the logic of norms and the logic of normative propositions. E. Bulygin concentrated his attention on comparative analysis of analytical philosophy of law and of metaphysical conceptions of rationality in law. In his presentation C. Carcova defended the postulates of the school of critical legal studies. R. Vigo stresses the importance of natural law and legal argumentation in philosophy of law. In his presentation J. Cerdio attempted to differentiate law from morality through the lenses of Kantian division between theoretical reason and practical reason. R. Gibourg described and compared the relative force of magical and rational principles in law. In the presentation of E. Lisanuyk three images of deontic logic in law were analyzed.
In July, 2015, the Russian President signed Law No. 264-FZ which grants to Russian citizens the right to request delisting of search results which link to inaccurate or irrelevant information about them (“the right to be forgotten”). According to its drafters, the law is expected to adapt Russian law to the European practice. This article recounts the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Google Spain v. AEPD and Mario Costeja González, the case which inspired Law No. 264-FZ, and analyses commonalities and differences between the judgment of the Court of Justice and Law No. 264-FZ.The decision in Google Spain v. AEPD and Mario Costeja González was decided with reference to the principles contained in the data protection legislation. Guided by these principles, the Court of Justice of the European Union sought to strike a balance between the individual’s right to privacy and right of the public to access the information. As a consequence, search engine operators in the European Union are not obliged to remove search results if there is the preponderant interest of the general public in having access to the information in question. In contrast, Law No. 264-FZ is not based on data protection principles and introduced the sui generis right to request delisting of search results. The law contains a number of differences from the decision in Google Spain v. AEPD and Mario Costeja González. Most critically, Law No. 264-FZ fails to give due consideration to the public’s right to access information and does not contain a similar general exception from delisting of search results.
This paper aims to analyse the philosophical premises on which the idea of unity of law (the identity of legal systems) is based. In the history of legal philosophy, this idea found its main arguments in the presumption of totality of legal regulation. Such totality affected the philosophical tenets of holism, according to which law is not limited to positive-law rules and institutes. Law refers to supreme values, which supersede legal instruments created by human beings and collectives to regulate their behaviour. This argument implies that there are higher values, such as justice, good, etc., which underlie all social relations and which provide the binding force for positive law. The author argues that this line of thought is based on philosophical objectivism and naturalism, and can easily lead to the primacy of the social over the individual. To substantiate the idea of the systematicity of law, one can turn to modern debates on the logic of social cohesion and construct a legal system identity as a purely intellectual hypothesis necessary for thinking about law. This integrity can be described as a unity of discourse, or as a unity of societal practices. This reconstruction of the integrity of law can be extended by appealing to the basic ideas of the normative philosophy of law (from Hart and Kelsen to Raz and Dworkin) and is reconcilable with the conception of normative systems of Bulygin–Alchourron.
The article analyses the different sources of religious legal systems, principally the sources of the canon law of the Christian church, and it discovers a common paradigm shared by the seemingly different sources of different religious legal systems developed within the Judeo-Christian Biblical legal tradition. The author analyses, on the one hand, the decretal letters of the popes, which formed the main part of the medieval corpus of canon law in the Western Church; and, on the other hand, the writings of the Holy Fathers in conjunction with the imperial legislation and the canons of the Church Councils in the Eastern Church. This analysis elucidates a common paradigm for both traditions of canon law, which may be characterized as an ‘authoritative-instructive’ paradigm. The article shows that the instructive ‘pole’ within that paradigm is a distinctive feature of a religious legal system as such, and goes on to demonstrate its existence in the predecessor of the Christian legal tradition—Jewish law--and to outline similar features in such sources of Jewish law as rabbinic rulings, the King’s Law (the enactments of secular rulers in the context of the Halakha) and the responsa. The key point is that the common paradigm expresses itself in a seemingly different manner mostly in response to external factors—the political, social, and cultural differences between the societies in which each respective system of religious law operates—and not because of religious or theological differences in the actual teachings of the religious legal systems.
This article is devoted to the analysis of the constitutional status of the President of Brazil, as guaranteed by the Brazilian constitution, vis-a-vis statuses of heads of states os other BRICS countries.
In September 2013 Russia enacted a new law on education which introduced significant changes into the system of sources for Russian educational law. This article analyses the provisions of the education law that pertain to sources of educational law in the Russian Federation, the elationship between different levels of normative and legal regulation, including: international, national (federal laws and by-laws, legal regulation of relations in education at the regional and municipal levels in the Russian Federation), and the place of local normative acts within the mechanism for legal regulation of relations in education.
This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the concept of “state immunity” as reflectedin the legislation and judicial practice of the Russian Federation. A study in decisions ofRussian courts prior to the adoption of the Federal Law on Immunities of 2016 leads to theconclusion that, even during the juridical consolidation of the theory of absolute immunity inRussia, on a number of questions Russia in fact adhered to a theory of functional immunity.The concept of absolute immunity which the USSR followed (and which Russia as itslegal successor subsequently also followed) gradually began to conflict with the RussianFederation’s foreign economic activity and contract practices, and instances of Russia’srenunciation of absolute immunity increased in frequency. This tendency clearly shows that inthe 21st century the state cannot have absolute immunity because that version of sovereigntyconflicts with the global practice of state participation in private international relations. Inother words, the Russian Federation with the adoption of its Federal Law on Immunities hasmoved away from a theory of absolute immunity to acknowledge and employ a theory of thefunctional immunity of the state. At the same time, the Law on Immunities of 2016 alreadyrequires more elaboration and corrections even though it was only recently passed andimplemented. The methodology of study is based on the application of formal, logicaland comparative research methods together with general systematic methods of analysisand synthesis, deduction and induction. Questions touched upon in this article are widelydiscussed in establishing doctrines of private international law in both foreign and in Russianstudies. Issues connected with state immunity are raised by the authors and suggestions fortheir resolution are formulated based on the legal experience of contemporary Russia.
The article tracks the preservation and development the of Russian-language information space as a social and cultural phenomenon. The author studies various ways to overcome its disintegration, looks at issues connected with necessity of harmonizing two principles - freedom of information and securing intellectual property rights. He presents proposals about methods of legal regulation of these problems.
The discrepancy between the state of administration of customs payments and the requirements imposed on it, the need to improve the efficiency of fiscal activities of customs bodies, the introduction of new levers of influence for the receipt of customs payments have determined the relevance of the study. January 1, 2015 was formed by the EAEC, which was a transition to the next stage of interstate economic integration, which requires changes in the administration of customs payments.
The development of private international law and international civil proceedings law in the area of consumer protection does not solve completely the problems faced by the weaker party when making cross-border consumer contracts. Conflict rules and jurisdiction rules are addressed primarily to the national court, but for economic reasons, consumers rarely seek protection of their rights in court if the case is related to the legal orders of several countries. The solution of this problem lies in the development of more flexible, rapid and inexpensive way to resolve disputes out of court. The examination of the EU Directive on Alternative Dispute Resolution leads to conclusion that it only sets basic standards for the out-of-court consumer dispute resolution industry, but contains no specific procedural rules. In addition, the article provides a critical view of the EU Regulation on the online dispute resolution: Webplatform for the consumer disputes resolution, created on its basis, has very limited functionality and essentially performs only mediation, facilitating the consumer to find the national alternative dispute resolution agency but not exercising proper arbitration of consumer disputes. Great hopes are vested in the UNCITRAL Rules on Online Dispute Resolution, under development: in addition to the principles and standards this document contains specific procedural rules. It is noted that the UNCITRAL Rules will be an important addition to the Regulation on online dispute resolution. However, in view of the universal international character of the UNCITRAL Rules, as a soft law act, they can be used not only in the European Union, but also in all other countries, where the law provides for the possibility of online dispute resolution. As an example of the successful online platform for the settlement of lowvalue disputes the author analyzes the experience of the Chinese e-commerce portal. A study of its Online Transactions Dispute Rules confirmed that in comparison with the procedure for resolving such disputes at the state courts, online arbitration is a faster and more effective alternative.
At the end of 2010 there was series of political crises in the Arab world and this period came to be known as “the Arab Spring”. Islam has played a significant role in these events. In certain countries overthrowing the existing regimes resulted in Islamic governments coming to power. A number of aspects of the Arab Spring attracted the attention of contemporary Islamic legal thought. Its different schools diverge in the assessment of the mass protests. Islamic jurisprudence explains the “fiqh of revolution” which justifies the demonstrations and protests against the regime from a Sharia-based point of view.
The article is devoted to the problems of informing persons interested in technical regulations maintenance. On the basis of the analysis of legislation the author identifies legal grounds of providing information and subjects with information duties and persons to be informed. The article contains information about situation in the field, about order and conditions of presenting such information.
The artickle tackles the issues of a key term of contract between the owner of a vessel and the charterer for the use of a vessel (charter party) - a safe port. The concept of a safe port and requirements (terms) which it is to meet - nautical, sanitary, political and legal - have been worded. A safe port clause tends to be a requisite of contract of affreightment. It is very close but it does not dovetail other related clauses of this contract - «as close as the vessel can approach safely», «always afloat», «not always afloat, but safe on the bottom». Shipowner has a right not to implement the requiement of the other party - merchant - on directing the ship to a safe port. The safe port term is treated as a guarantee of a free port under English law. This means that the breach of guarantee by the merchant entails damage to the vessel for the merchant in any case. The merchant may be indemnified only if the vessel's captain performing the merchant's order breaks the chain («novus actus intervieniens»). Under Russian law, the liability of the merchant for directing the vessel to an unsafe port is a contractual liability based on the principle of guilt.