Аннотация: This article covers issues related to legal system of constituent entity of the Russian Federation and correlation between legal systems of constituent entities of the Russian Federation and the legal system of entire Russia. Constitution of the Russian Federation does not use the term “legal system of constituent entity of the Russian Federation.” It only refers to the existence of legal system of the Russian Federation as a whole. It is an established fact that with regard to description of legal provisions adopted in constituent entities of the Russian Federation, it would be more accurate to use such term as “system of legal provisions established in regulatory legal acts and other forms (sources) of law of constituent entities of the Russian Federation.” This allows to avoid using theoretically dubious terms such as “regional legal system” or “legal system of constituent entity of the Russian Federation.” There are specific examples of incorrect usage of legal terms, for instance, in the Charter of Irkutsk region there is reference to the fact that Irkutsk region has “regulatory system of Irkutsk region.” However, the author thinks that it actually refers to the “system of regulatory provisions of Irkutsk region,” or “the system of legislation of Irkutsk region.” Furthermore, concerning a number of states it is only possible to mention the permissibility of using the term “legal system of constituent entity of the Federation.” For instance, some states in the United States of America not only have their own legislation concerning a number of branches of law, but also have distinct features pertaining to legal processes and institutions, as well as specifics of legal practice. Without any doubt, there are “regional legal systems” existing in unitarian states. For example, it is an established fact, that there is such thing as the legal system of Faroe Islands, which are self-governed territory as part of Denmark. As a result, the author makes a conclusion concerning the importance of streamlining the system of legal provisions within the context of maintaining the wholeness of legal environment within the territory of the Russian Federation. It is essential that constituent entities of the Federation don not contain any original sources of law that are not found on the federal level. Certainly, a number of entities of the Russian Federation have specific terms to denote particular regulatory provisions.

Аннотация: Recently many scholars, including those working in law of legal procedure, turn to problems of execution of judicial power and justice in sphere of civil procedure. Monographs by M.I. Kleandrov, S.K. Zagainova, S.L. Degterev and other publications are good examples of this trend. No less importance is devoted to these problems in other branches of legal science as well as in general theory of law. The author of the article thinks that clarification of the essence of justice is possible only in connection with judicial power and it can be done only outside of the borders of any concrete branch of law. The main idea of the article is that justice is a single notion as well as judicial power. There is no criminal, civil, constitutional justice as a separate legal phenomenon, but there is execution of justice in different spheres of judicial procedure. The article criticizes identification of justice with judicial procedure. When finding out correlation between judicial power and justice, the author addresses to definition of judicial power and its functions made by N.A. Kolokolov in his scientific study on judicial power. The conclusion of this scientist concerning single mechanism of state power – is in a way a key to solve the problem of functions of judicial power. Another starting point of the discussion was the definition of function given by V.N. Protasov who defines “function as the kind of activity, the influences which should be produced by this or that system (state, law, state organ, science, theory and so on) in order to fulfill its tasks, and reach its targets.” From this position the author gives her critical evaluation of opinions of the scientists who identify function with task or target. Another position where justice is regarded as a target of judicial power is considered to be wrong. The author states that justice is a “multifunction” of judicial power. In other words, justice is regarded as an integral many-sided multifunctional due activity of organs of judicial power. Approach to justice as to due activity (multifunction) in contrast with real activity, i.e. on concrete actions, gives the author reasons for creation of multi-sided characteristics and approaches to justice. First of all, she considers it reasonable to regard justice as a function of judicial power stated as a norm of law. In other words, legal norms defining justice in all its multitude will be the object of analysis. But there exists another approach which is no less important. It is comparing of due action and real action: in frameworks of judicial procedure justice may be executed or it may be repudiated. In case of repudiation judicial procedure (as a process) will take place, but there will be no justice. Undoubtedly, there is a need to analyze reasons and conditions which make judicial procedure unjust.

Аннотация: The effective Civil code of the Russian Federation defines the entrepreneurial activities and identifies its subjects referring to civilians: individual entrepreneurs and commercial organizations. The Code contains a comprehensive definition of the forms of commercial organizations. Those are business partnerships, associations and companies, production cooperatives, governmental and municipal enterprises. The analysis of the Code norms gives the grounds to make a conclusion that the business circle of the subjects of entrepreneurial activities does not coincide with the above list of juridical persons, namely, commercial organizations. There are plenty of practical evidences of dynamic entrepreneurial activities of many a not-for-profit organizations (organizations financed by the Russian Federation, by the subjects of the Russian Federation, by the municipal institutions and by any other owners are no exception) that regularly carry out business activities aimed at profit making enabling them, firstly, to exist and to carry out the activities determined by the constituent documents of a not-forprofit organization. Secondly, as a rule, the profit obtained by not-for-profit organizations becomes the source to increase the wages, amount of option money, awards, etc. both of the employees and the participants of these organizations. Undoubtedly, this fact can not be considered as “distribution of the profits among the participants of not-for-profit organizations” although the deviation in terms of the usage of the profit, exclusively relative to the objectives to be achieved by the established not-for-profit organization, in our opinion, is obvious in such a situation. The subjects of entrepreneurial activities are referred to as enterprises in the literature on economic aspects contrary to the definition given in the Code. The expression “enterprise” is used as the synonym of the notation of all the commercial organizations. As for the Code this term is used only to notate the governmental and municipal unitary enterprises. Article 132 of the Code defines an enterprise as a property complex recognized by the immovables that are the object of the civic rights. Both before and after the passing of the new Code, the new definition of the subjects of entrepreneurial activities – “economic agent” – has been appearing and is currently used in the regulatory acts. The expression “economic agents” is applicable only to organizations – commercial juridical persons and civilians- entrepreneurs – although the circle of the subjects entitled to carry out the entrepreneurial activities is wide comprising not-for-profit organizations – juridical persons. This article pays special attention to the study and analysis of the civil personality of farming businesses and partnerships.

Аннотация: Various interventions into the field of exclusive rights, impairment of copyright and intellectual property rights are provided on different grounds and causes by international legal acts and the legislation of the Russian Federation. However, it seems to be exercised somehow contradictorily in the absence of exact understanding of the legal nature of limitations and encumbrances. The expressions “limitation” and “encumbrance” with regard to exclusive rights are applied inconsistently at the most; there are no coherent references to the properties of limitations and encumbrances; these notions are frequently substituted by wider sense expressions, such as “intervention,” “infringement” and “withdrawal.” In cases when an owner of exclusive rights apparently suffers from certain constraints, based on provisions of law or as a result of a transaction, that is, owing to making of a copyright or license agreement, identification of resale royalty and access rights or as a result of issuance of compulsory license, termination of patent, imposing of payment of patent fees or permission for free use of intellectual property and in other similar cases, but the notations “limitation” and “encumbrance” are not used directly by the legislation; scholars, based on their own scientific considerations, state the facts of identification of limitations or encumbrances of exclusive rights. And there is no single doctrinal approach to legal regulation and theoretical comprehension of the essence of these phenomena. Moreover, since the notion “encumbrance” with regard to exclusive rights is not used at all in any international and domestic regulatory acts, application of the word combination “encumbrance of exclusive rights” is more likely spontaneous and not quite cognizant. The issues of limitation and encumbrance of copyright and allied rights are not touched upon in the Act of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. At the same time, from the standpoint of the implemented codification of exclusive rights the approved decision with regard to the scientific comprehension and definition of the general line of regulation of the set of constraints and encumbrances of exclusive rights is extremely important. Contradictions in comprehension of the legal nature of different infringements of exclusive rights, being extremely necessary to be eliminated to implement the system legal approach to cognition, trial in practice and enhancement of the new Section of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation related to intellectual property, seem to be feasible to be solved by applying of scientific interpretation of limitations and encumbrances of property law to the regulation of limitations and encumbrances of exclusive rights. Similar dissemination seems to be possible owing to the fact of the legislator’s acknowledging the positive function of exclusive rights and actual applying of some elements of the structure of right of ownership for the purpose of implementation of this function. In spite of the circumstances determining the differences in the regimes of right of ownership and of exclusive rights, the closeness of the legal nature and functions of the right of ownership of property and intellectual property as well as the possibility to rate these notions even though generalized as absolute rights suggests, on the one hand, that the monopoly of the subject of exclusive right shall not be unlimited, but, on the other hand, that such subject shall be in possession of possibilities comparable with the possibilities of an owner to exercise the right, including the possibility to vest some persons with a part or the entire set of authorities constituting the exclusive right. From the above standpoint, limitations of exclusive rights shall be considered to be the identification or narrowing of the boundaries (limits) of their exercising that shows up as narrowing of the existing permissions, imposing of bans and additional affirmative duties under the law, regulation of the authorized governmental body or local governmental authority for the purpose of protection of the foundations of the constitutional system, morality, health, rights and legitimate interests of other persons, of assurance of the defence of the country and the security of the state. In its turn, the rights of the third parties to the results of intellectual labor determined as additional to the main exclusive right and following the main right irrespective the change of its subject shall be considered to be the encumbrance of the relative exclusive right. In other words, encumbrance of exclusive right implies the transfer of some of its constituent authorities to the persons exercising the right retaining the redistributed rights in their potential form with the holder of the rights. On the contrary, limitations of intellectual property right mean withdrawal of certain possibilities of a right holder from the field of permitted conduct. It should be acknowledged that it is required to include the expression “encumbrance” in the field of regulation of exclusive rights as notation of one of manifestations of exercising of exclusive right as well as indication of legal phenomena constraining such right in a definite way but not included in the regime of its limitations.

Аннотация: The sphere of research and information based on permanent research of the corruption situation and fight against it is of a major importance for elaborating a national approach to fulfilling international anti-corruption agreements. The necessity to improve research procedures is defined by the UN Convention against Corruption as of 31, December 2003, to the implementation of which the Russian Federation has pledged itself. For example, Article 61 of the Convention deals with accumulating and analyzing information on corruption. In order to meet these requirements an effort was taken in the current report to compare the results of criminological research and expertise of non-profit organizations related to assessing corruption and the efficiency of the fight against it in the current situation in Russia. In particular the expert research methods used by Transparency International and other Russian non-profit organizations were analyzed. The differences between the methods of assessing corruption and the efficiency of fight against it are evaluated in regard to their representativeness (reliability), objectivity, and integrity. Disadvantages of sample or limited research are highlighted. Such types of research don’t produce clear criteria for defining the level of corruption and result in relative notion of its real condition and regularities. An outline of the method of corruption research in its various manifestations and the fight against them is given. The article is a presentation of a previously issued complex monograph that contains the main results and conclusions of the conducted research. Besides dealing with the results of the author’s criminological research of corruption and fight against it the report also takes up certain measures, implementation of which should be associated with the improvement of the report in this sphere. In particular the report highlights the necessity of a normative defining procedure for different types of corruption that will be subjected to research. It is underlined that the absence of such a procedure causes subjective presuppositions on the level of corruption. The implementation of this will allow classifying corruption-related unlawful acts with the view of arranging them in a unified statistical register. The report also substantiates the necessity to consolidate the research and information activity, a special statistical register of showings on corruption-related crime, as well as to consolidate the assessment of the counteraction efficiency within the framework of a specialized authority on fight against corruption. The implementation of the measures will enable a corruption research that will meet the requirements of anti-corruption conventions, as well as getting reliable assessment of the counteraction efficiency.

Аннотация: International regulation of money-laundering consists of many international treaties. But there is no any definition of money-laundering in the treaties. Doctrine of law tries to make up for the deficiency. In the article different interpretations of the concept are shown. Having analysed provided positions, the author defines moneylaundering of criminal proceeds as the process of rendering them the legal state and their next leading into legal economic turn-round. In the article the necessity of moving the money-laundering’s rule into the chapter about crimes against justice is criticized. The necessity of using the term “proceeds” in Criminal Code is proved because the term meets the requirements of international law. But the definition of “proceeds” should be given in explanatory note to the article for moneylaundering. The article notes that money-laundering is the crime concerned with criminal proceeds but not unlegal proceeds. The author pays attention that there is no concordance of opinions in the question about predicate crimes. As it is supposed, there is no necessity to exclude any crimes from the list of predicate crimes. That’s why it is important to withdraw from the present rule and unfile the crimes which are in articles 174 and 1741 of Russian Criminal Code by applying “liminal” approach. Inconsistence of money-laundering’s rules with each other and with international law is marked in the article. To pursuit of Russian duty, enacted by treaties, it is supposed to be necessary to reproduce international money-laundering’s rules in Russian Criminal Code. Mental element in money-laundering crimes is essential to be amended and the construction “if a person knows or has good reasons to believe, that proceeds were obtain by committing a crime” should be inserted. According to international law, money-laundering is accomplished with the purpose of concealing or disguising the illicit origin of the property or of assisting any person who is involved in the commission of the predicate offence to evade the legal consequences of his actions. The same purpose should be defined in Russian Criminal Code. In addition, it is necessary to withdraw from two articles, determining liability for money-laundering, and to leave one of them, containing indicias of both articles. On basis of the conducted research the author makes his own conclusions and proposes his own version of Criminal Code’s article: “Money-laundering of criminal proceeds by a person who committed a predicate crime, or other person knows or has good reasons to believe, that proceeds were obtain by committing a crime, for the purpose of concealing or disguising the illicit origin of the property or of assisting any person who is involved in the commission of the predicate offence to evade the legal consequences of his actions, – is punished…” The explanatory note to the article should be set forth in the following way: “1. Money-laundering of criminal is the process of rendering them the legal state, committed by the conversion or transfer of the proceeds, concealment or disguise of the true nature, source, location, disposition, movement, rights with respect to or ownership of property, knowing that such property is proceeds; acquisition, possession or use of property, knowing, at the time of receipt, that such property was proceeds. 2. All objects of civil law may be considered as proceeds.”

Аннотация: It is stated in the literature on criminal and legal aspects that the Criminal code comprises many groups of essential elements of offense that include characteristic features of identical meaning. This fact sets conditions for the necessity to distinguish the conceptions, when legally categorizing them. In order to know what rules shall be applied, it is required to determine the relationship between the essential elements of offence with regard to which the shared, that is, identical characteristic features have been found out. This relationship can become apparent in the essential elements of offence being allied or in such that are provided by the competitive norms. There is a difference between the rules to overcome the competition between the criminal and legal norms and the rules to distinguish the allied essential elements of offence as well as a difference in the moment of origination of the competition between the criminal and legal norms and the adjacency of the essential elements of offence. That is why the problem to determine the relationships between the adjacency phenomena and other similar criminal and legal phenomena, in particular, such as the competition of criminal and legal norms, is theoretically important and practically significant. These phenomena are brought together by the availability of rather a large number of similar features. First of all, both the allied essential elements of offence and those provided by the competitive norms have the characteristic features that fall together by implication. Moreover, only one norm providing these essential elements of offence shall be applied in each specific case. And, lastly, there is a problem of choice of a norm with regard to categorization of one and the same crime. Comparative study and analysis of the essential elements of offence having the shared characteristic features enable to identify the criteria that make it possible to determine the way the essential elements of offence to be distinguished are related. It is the nature of relationship between the norms providing these essential elements of offence; the nature of relation of the shared characteristic features of these essential elements of offence; the nature of relationship between the characteristic features the meanings of which are different with regard to the essential elements of offence having the shared characteristic features. The relationship between the shared characteristic features provided by the norms that can compete in terms of the part and the whole unlike the relationship between the shared characteristic features of the allied essential elements of offence is characterized by the fact that the set of the characteristic features shared by the essential elements of offence provided by the norms competing in terms of the part and the whole is a part of the characteristic features of the essential elements of offence provided by the norm in the whole and, at the same time constitutes the independent essential elements of offence. The relationship between the shared characteristic features of the essential elements of offence provided by the norms competing as the general and special ones is characterized by the fact that all the characteristic features of the essential elements of offence contained in the general norm are included in the special norm as well. The trait of the relationship between the characteristic features with different implications in the essential elements of offence provided by the norms competing in terms of the part and the whole is that the compound essential elements of offence have additional characteristic features not included into the essential elements of offence related to it as a part. But the latter has no characteristic features corresponding to these additional characteristic features of the compound essential elements of offence. In order to prove the nonidentity of the relationship between the essential elements of offence provided by the competitive special norms and the relationship between the allied essential elements of offence, it is required, firstly, to determine the availability of the characteristic features that consolidate the competition of special criminal and legal norms with other types of competition in the criminal law; secondly, to attest the availability of the criteria by which the essential elements of offence provided by the competitive special norms differ from the allied essential elements of offence.

Аннотация: International guarantees and control are considered by the international law to be the key means of ensuring of contractual obligations of the states. The priority of these means over other methods of ensuring of the execution of international obligations is stipulated by the importance given to them by the states. The frequency of application of guarantees and control in the interstate relationships emphasizes, above all, their large international significance. The nature of the definition of the notation of the “international guarantees” developed by the science of law enables, in general, to state that this instrument of ensuring of execution of warranties and representations given by some states to other participants of the international relationships with regard to the certain manner and behavior ensuring the observance of the established rules or the status of some state or a group of states, of the execution of the international obligations or of maintaining of a certain status of the international relationships. Hence, the obligations under a guarantee agreement contemplate the following: 1) strict observance of the established rules and procedures by the states-guarantors; and 2) along with the above, dynamic actions ensuring the observance of rights and restoration of the infringed rights or violated procedures. In case of taking actions mentioned in paragraph 2) the guarantors undertake to do their best to motivate other states to execute the obligations being the subject of the guarantees. Guarantees and control being involved in the unified system of international relationships are characterized by certain compatibility. The example could be the fact that the control over execution of contractual provisions disciplines the participants thereof and, in this sense, guarantees their adherence to the obligations. Exactly in the same way, international guarantees presume carrying out of inspections agreed by the states, that is, exercise of control. At the same time, the close connection of these notions does not eliminate the distinction between them. Legal guarantees and legal control remain their permanent property of independent means of ensuring of international agreements. As it is mentioned above, the protective function of international legal guarantees even surpasses the advantages of the international control. Therefore, such characteristic relationship as well as the possibility to apply guarantees and control both independently and together finally convinces us in the comprehensive compatibility of these notions.

Аннотация: The article in divided into two parts in terms of its structure: liability for human traffic in Russia and liability for human traffic under the Criminal code of Germany. The regulations and norms of the Russian criminal law are reviewed in the first part. In particular, it is noted that in 2003 Article 152 was excluded from the Criminal code of the Russian Federation (Traffic of under-age) and at the same time the Code was supplemented with Article 1271 (Human traffic). Inclusion of this regulation into the Section dealing with crimes against freedom, honor and dignity was approved by almost all the scholars. Inclusion of the regulation of human traffic into the Russian Criminal code was a major step forward since any human traffic (not only regarding children) is an act of significant social danger. Moreover, the necessity to establish these independent essential elements of offence was determined by the international law and specified by the international obligations of the Russian Federation. However, the international legal norm of liability for human traffic was implemented into the criminal law of Russia without the required adaptation to the present-day situation in Russia that is why it was severely criticized by the scientific community. In particular, it is noted that among the acts listed in the law only purchase and sale constitute the human traffic in its proper sense. It means illegal onerous transaction under which one party (seller) transfers one or several persons subject to payment to the other party (purchaser); the purchaser obtains them and transfers a fee in terms of money, property or right to property to the seller. In such a case, both the person intending to use directly “the human commodity” and the person acquiring it for the purpose of resale and deriving of property benefit can act as the purchaser All the rest acts listed in Part 1 of Article 1271 of the Code are not the trade in the exact meaning of the word but are merely associated with purchase and sale of a person and facilitating its making. The list of possible actions resulting in a person losing his status and turning to be a subject of transaction is far from being completed. That is why time and again the experts have been making suggestions to supplement the references related to Article 1271 of the Code with reference to “other transactions” involving human beings. The Russian legislator included a special purpose into the subjective aspect of human traffic: the legislator associates the performance of all the actions listed in the reference with the purpose of exploitation of the person involved in the trade with regard to him. Although using of the purpose of exploitation of the wronged person in the reference to the regulation corresponds to the international legal notation of human traffic but it is not socially conditioned, since the parties under the transaction or a middleman in some cases can act having no such purpose. The provisions of the German Criminal code with regard to the liability for human traffic are reviewed in the second part of this article. Specific essential elements of offence, objects of crime, system arrangements in the criminal law structure, matters related to the background of crime, criminal attempts as well as to liability for accompliceship and rendering assistance are considered. Ancillary criminal regulations applied in cases of impossibility to hold liable for human traffic are studied. Contents and structure of the essential elements of offence as well as sanctions in case of certain essential elements of offence: definition of characteristic features of human traffic, deed, means and purpose of crime, exclusion of crime on the basis of consent of the wronged person are investigated particularly. The issues of criminal liability of clients using the services of persons forced to exercise prostitution are indicated.

Аннотация: The majority of the present-day states assign monogamy as the main principle of the family law: a new marriage can not be contracted until another marriage is dissolved. The exception is some Moslem countries, countries of tropical Africa and of South-eastern Asia permitting such marriage forms as polygyny and polyandry along with monogamy. However, polygamy forms of marriage existed in the Old Rus state. Monogyny appeared only during the Christian era and polygyny reigned during the Pagan era. Since 1917 a complete freedom of divorce has been given; an application for a new marriage was proposed to be considered as a sufficient ground for dissolving of the prior marriage. At the same time, not only the registered marriage status of one or both applicants was an obstacle to enter into a new marriage but also the valid registered marriage status (for example, wedded marriage or actual cohabitation). At present an issue of legalization of polygamy is raised in some Subjects of the Russian Federation, in particular, in the Republics of Tatarstan, Ingushetiya and Chechnya. The public at large and the legal community oppose such establishments, the main argument of legalization of polygamy being the statement of infringement of rights of women. However, this argument is not convincing as it is the rights of women in unregistered polygamy units that are not protected. It is considered that temporary or permanent marriage of one woman with only one man is the achievement of women; it is stated that polygamy has been humiliating for a woman. Nevertheless, the status of a common law wife lacking rights is more humiliating for a woman, including contemporary women, and in case of illegitimate children it is a complicated procedure of affiliation with an alleged natural father in the absence of the good will thereof. The author considers it to be expedient to establish polygamy as the permission to register marital relationships subject to certain conditions. The first one is the means of a man, his capability to support his wives and children in an equally worthy manner. The second one is the consent of women to the status of polygamy since a voluntary marriage is not done away with. The article also analyzes the world-wide experience with regard to monogamy and polygamy as the marriage forms. The author comes to a conclusion that monogamy turns out to be a stable family form but the duration of its existence, nevertheless, has resulted in its modification. Polygamy can not be prohibited in such a society in which conjugal infidelity is not criminalized and free sexual relationships are possible, etc. However, one of the missions of a polygamy marriage is to guarantee a possibility that every woman has a family and children.

Аннотация:

Аннотация: