Аннотация: The article deals with the history of the formation and interrelation of public and private law in Russia in the XIX and the beginning of the XX centuries. In the frame of this research the following theoretical problems are being analyzed: the notion, the system of public and private law in their historical development and interrelation. The authors of the article focus their attention on the study of the theoretical researches of the question of classification of public and private law in Ancient Rome, Western Europe and Russian Empire. Special legal terminology formed in the above mentioned period in legal studies, the degree of using loanwords in the Roman and Western European legal traditions are also touched upon in this article. It is proved that the theoretical researches of the Roman and Western European lawyers turned to be the source of borrowings for the Russian legal science, the present legislation, law-enforcing and court practice and it provided the formation of integrated system of the points of view on these questions. The problem in question found its reflection in the theoretical, historiclegal and special legal literature of that period. At the beginning of the XIX century this problem was developing within the frame of the jurisprudence and the encyclopedia of law. The formation of the system of law in the Russian Empire in the XIX century was going on under the influence if the natural-legal doctrine but it was superseded in the 30th of the XIX century by the historical school of law. Since that time we can witness the new stage of development in the understanding this problem. The basis for it was the experience we acquired in the process of the systematization of the present legislation. Liberal reforms of the 60th and 70th this problem got the new colors, as the legal community raised the question of the possibilities and expedience of the law codification. The activity of the legal community made the debates about the division of private and public law more heated. In the second half of the XIX and the beginning of the XX century legal positivism strengthened its influence and it defined the development of jurisprudence as a whole and certain branches of law in particular. This period, the period of the development of the theoretical and legal ideas in Russia, became the turning point for the clear understanding and separation of the approaches to this problem. As for the scientific criterion of the division into periods the history of the public and private law in Russia formation, we apply the formal side of law: the form of rules, the form of law, the form of systematization. The specific interest is caused by the question of the development of the branch principle of the Russian law systematization as the main factor defining the private and public law formation.

Аннотация: This article looks into the issues of legal liberalism as a universal category of social existence. The phenomenon is being authentically perceived as a system of postulations and restraints of human freedom determined by both external and internal normative (regulatory) universes of personal behavior. The author points out that, in the context of comparative jurisprudence, axiology of two main forms of legal liberalism – collective and individual – would be appropriate. Accordingly, collective legal liberalism is based on the idea of “forced solidarity,” ie solidarity having various determinants (ethnic or religious identity of social commonality, its historical mission, etc). In historical past and present such culture-and-value basis was used during construction of own normative (regulatory) elements of legal systems by traditional societies, clerical and theocratic states as well as states of socialist tint of political color. The individual type of legal liberalism signifies a fundamentally new turn in development of humankind. While the collective variant of liberalism has purely social foundations and is ontologized strictly within the framework of “individual – individual” or “individual – society” structures, its individualistic counterpart acquires supra-positive and metaphysical sense. Indisputable “merits” of that type of legal liberalism are in practical unfolding (development) of ius-naturalism structures. However, one should not forget about the dangers hidden in absolutization of will of a “singular” in society. The main threat contained in legal liberalism of an extreme type of localization is that individual freedom of one social unit is not just postulated but opposed to freedom of other social units. As for the choice in favor of one or another variant of objectification of legal liberalism, it may be determined by both purely national guidelines of legal systems and universal regularities of the global legal field. It looks like in future legal liberalism of both types of objectification is going to continue its route of an “existing phenomenon” in legal systems of the world. And the dynamics of its unfolding in specific political and legal realities will be influenced by both qualitative characteristics of vertical succession (continuity) and the speed rates of its horizontal variant.

Аннотация: Besides many basic acts Bracton’s treatise and several others enriched English law in XIII century. In abundance of legal documents there is one anonymous legal treatise also known as Placita Corone considered the issues of criminal process only. It has been remaining very popular among lawyers, men of affairs and religious houses for more than a century since it was written. Placita Corone describes criminal cases during the period when private criminal prosecution and especially appeals was at their peak, and public prosecution especially indictment was in the making. It was effectual for more than a century because of many copies have been issued for a wide audience – lawyers, men of affairs and religious houses. The treatise has full and short versions with a little difference in meaning, but the short version has some textual differences and additions. The treatise in full version consists of several semantic parts: the prologue, the examples of judicial inquiry of several appeals: for wounding, of a woman for the killing of her husband in her arms, of a woman who has been raped, for robbery, against those who were abettors in the above robbery, for procuring, commanding, or receiving, for robbery done at night, against the receiver, for theft; three examples of indictings: for theft, for a killing done in self defence, and for petty treason (traitorously killed master). In short version the contents of the full version repeats abstractively, without any classification and without observance of an order of consideration of judicial investigations as it was done in full version. Private criminal prosecuting in medieval England was complicated, long and expensive process extended over the years. Even experienced lawyer was not always able to remember all the abstrusities of the numerous proceedings. Note-making in the court could not correct a deficiency in knowledge of procedure because of being abrupt and fragmentary. Placita Corone actually helped them to fill in the blanks in knowledge of the procedure and thereby gave them written over and classified court roll records, and the use of words “si devez saver,” “fet asaver, “ore devez saver,” and “ore est a saver” indicates its training role and academic interest as component parts of the treatise.

Аннотация: Within the bounds of transition period while new subjects of Russian Federation are founded, bodies of state power in united subjects of Russian Federation in addition must decide an issue with operation of a law in the new subject’s territory. Passing in every concrete case of unification federal constitutional law is called on to consider specifics of new subject’s foundation, including transition period features. Absolutely that specifics of new subject’s foundation (or their enlargement) and features of their periods of transition have had an effect on lawmaking process in these subjects of Russian Federation, and introduced some innovations into theory and practice of law-making process. This article lights a comprehensive research of the procedural aspects of the law-making generation in new subjects of Russian Federation in transition period of their foundation. The procedural aspects of law-making in new subjects of Russian Federation in transition period of their foundation has no any analogues in current constitutional law practice. These procedures differs from law-making process in subjects of Russian Federation, which exercised at current order and differ with the participation of regional parliament in federal law-making process. Law-making process in new subjects of Russian Federation in transition period of their foundation can be put into effect in three ways: exception of normative legal documents (acts) of united subjects to all territory of new subject of Russian Federation; combined law-making process by bodies of state power in united subjects in transition period; concerted law-making process by bodies of state power in united subjects in transition period. Integration of these ways is reduce to different models of law-making process appearance. Among them we can separate Perm, Irkutsk, Krasnoyarsk and Zabaikal model. To specific sources of legislative regulation of law-making process in new subjects of Russian Federation in transition period of their foundation refers agreements between bodies of state power in united subjects, their rules for lawmaking procedure, agreements between these bodies of state power and political executive of new united subjects.

Аннотация: The paper researches external factors that determine evolution of criminal procedure as a social institution. The evolution patterns of criminal procedure become manifest through the contents and correlation of the public principle and discretionary principle in criminal procedure. The concept of society comprises the following key token elements: a body of individuals possessing will and awareness; shared interest of perpetual and objective nature; interaction and cooperation based on shared interests; adjustment of social interests through mandatory universal rules of behavior; existence of organized force (power) able to secure internal order and external safety for the society; the society’s ability and genuine capacity to rejuvenate and improve itself. Formation of criminal procedure as a social institution based on optimized relationship between the public and the discretionary must fit the same principles. The trends in the criminal procedure’s evolution that become manifest through a certain correlation of the discretionary and public principles in criminal procedure, are conditioned by the evolution trends of statehood – in other words, to an extent they depend directly on the relationship between the statist and anti-statist vectors in the society’s evolution. The evolution trends of criminal procedure through definition of content and correlation of the public and discretionary principles are conditioned by main trends in man’s relations with national government. Historical experience has evidence that both the collectivist and the individualist theories are singlefaceted, as they fail to consider that the society as such is shaped of both individuals and collectives, it is a social body whose very health largely rests on the balance between the personal and the common. Evolution of criminal procedure is determined by correspondence between the fundamental principles that shape criminal procedure as a social institution and the fundamental elements that are indicators defining the concept of the society; correspondence between the main evolutionary patterns of the political power organization in the society and its social role; and building the relations between the state power and the personality based on spiritual values, solidarity and subsidiary approach. Unbalancing this interplay distorts the public principle both in the society as a whole and in the domain of criminal procedure as its part, where this principle is substituted by that of statehood. The interests of the political power (state interests) take the lead, and the effort to secure them justifies all means, including such that are gross infringement of individual citizens’ rights and lawful interests.

Аннотация: This article is concerned with the research of legal fund status as civil matter participants. The author carried out an analysis of the legal nature, characteristic of funds as an independent organizational and legal form of noncommercial legal persons .While noting that the term “fund” is used in some cases, names of organizations that are actually created in other forms than the fund, which leads to their identification of unnecessary and create problems in law enforcement. It also deals with the specific legal status of certain types of public, state-public, charitable funds. Special attention is paid to the funds established and operating under specifically enacted laws (centers of the historical heritage of the presidents of Russia, ceased to exercise its powers, the Federal Fund to promote housing construction). In considering the range of persons able to participate in the establishment of funds, explores the question of the theoretical and practical possibility of establishing a legal fund of the state and municipal entities. Also it is analyzed the relationship developing between the fund and its shareholders, given the fact that the fund created by voluntary property, contributions of founders and applies to organizations not having a membership. The author presents and investigates the various views expressed in the science on this issue. The article highlights the problems associated with the formation, structure determination and competence of government fund, which had not been in the theory and practice explicit permission. It is claimed that the lack of clear regulatory requirements concerning the place of the board of trustees in the structure of the fund, as well as the order of its formation, leads to the fact that in practice this authority is not fulfilling its purpose and is not endowed with its characteristic features. Based on the analysis of judicial practice by the author investigates issues related to the amendment of the charter fund, with the definition of the content of the special standing fund; disclosed conditions, the order and limits of the funds activity. The article discusses ihe rationale, procedure and consequences of termination of funds as legal entities through their reorganization and liquidation. Particular attention focuses on the theoretical and practical points of contention regarding the possible forms for the fund reorganization, separation of jurisdiction of cases on the elimination of funds between arbitration courts and courts of general jurisdiction, on the contradictions in the legal regulation of relations, that are emerging in the liquidation of public fund.

Аннотация: The authors try to analyze the current state of theory, legislation and case law in respect to the alimental duties in Russia. They reveal the defects of the legislation and enforcement practice; discuss the possible means to improving of the contemporary courts’ proceedings in this sphere.

Аннотация: The article is devoted to the role and possibilities of the Ministry of Justice of Russia, other federal governmental bodies in sphere of the expertise of draft legislation on corruption. The author proposes further modifications of the current order of the expertise.

Аннотация: The present article is devoted to the analysis of practice of petitions of Russian legal and physical persons in EU Court, and practice of consideration by Court of EU of pre-judicial inquiries of national courts of state members on such affairs. In the article the claims of the Soviet foreign-trading consolidations, of the Russian private persons submitted to 1990th are considered. Special attention in the article is given to the affairs considered by Court of EU under claims of the Russian physical persons.

Аннотация:

Аннотация:

Аннотация: