No 5 (2023)

The interpretation, fulfilled by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation provides continuality and stability in the functional connection of individual and legal regulation, it is especially necessary by the conditions of modern technologies development, which cause the appearance of new legal relations. The aim of the present research is the determination of the meaning of the acts of the interpretation of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in the process of individual and legal regulation of legal relations, which arise in the connection with development and spread of new technologies. To achieve this aim it is indispensable, firstly, to regard the legal nature of the judicial interpretation, secondly, to disclaim the peculiarities of legal regulation by the conditions of modern technologies development, thirdly, to define the role of interpretation acts of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation as an obliging kind of individual regulation of legal relations.

The methodological basis of this study is the scientifically based concept of integrative legal understanding by Professor V. V. Ershov. In this research there were used dialectic, systematic, functional and technical methods.

The performed research allowed to conclude that judicial interpretation is not judicial law making or law concretization. The acts of interpretation are a kind of individual regulation and take special place, where being in accord with legal regulation they are a consequence of arguments concerning the influence of legal norms or arising conflicts in the spheres, which are not yet regulated by the positive law. The role of acts of interpretation of the Supreme Court will grow due to existing both experimental legal orders, novelty and dynamism of springing up legal relations in the context of technological transformations.

Problem statement. Currently, the process of improving administrative legal proceedings is actively underway in the Russian Federation. It involves, in particular, the development of legal proceedings in cases of challenging actions (inaction) and decisions of control and supervisory authorities on the restoration of violated mandatory requirements, that is, on the resolution of restoration disputes. This, in turn, requires identification and detailed analysis of the problems that arise in judicial practice in this category of cases. Such allocation will help to further improve the administrative-procedural legislation and more effective protection of the rights and legitimate interests of participants in legal relations.

Goals and objectives of the study. The purpose of the work is to identify existing problems and difficulties that arise when courts resolve cases on challenging actions (inaction) and decisions of control and supervisory authorities on the restoration of violated mandatory requirements. This requires solving the tasks of determining the subject of such disputes, delineating the competence of courts of general jurisdiction and arbitration courts to resolve them, determining the applicable legislation, as well as identifying specific types of judicial errors in this category of cases.

Methods. During the research, systematic, logical, formal legal methods were used.

Results, brief conclusions. According to the results of the study, conclusions were drawn about the presence of certain typical categories of errors when resolving cases by courts on challenging actions (inaction) and decisions of control and supervisory authorities on the restoration of violated mandatory requirements. These errors are systematized and the possibilities of their prevention are indicated, taking into account the legal positions of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

Problem statement. The restriction by public entities of the circle of subjects for which the ownership right to ownerless things could be recognized did not allow to effectively solve the problem of returning electric grid facilities to property turnover. Having formed the material and legal prerequisites for solving this problem at the end of 2021, the legislator did not resolve the issue of the procedural procedure for recognizing the ownership rights of network organizations to such objects.

Goals and objectives of the study. Identification of the substantive and procedural problems of the application of the institute of recognition of ownership of ownerless things in relation to the objects of the electric grid economy, the formation of proposals to overcome them.

Research methods: dialectical, analysis, synthesis, formal and legal.

Results, brief conclusions. Differentiation of the type of mediating the acquisition of ownership of ownerless linear objects of legal proceedings according to the subject criterion (for public entities – special proceedings, for network organizations – claim proceedings) is not due to the substantive nature of the case and contradicts the prohibition of different treatment of persons in the same or similar situations arising from the constitutional principle of equality of all before the law and the court. The expediency of supplementing the arbitration procedural form with the procedure for considering such cases according to the model of special proceedings is substantiated.

Currently, the construction of an option agreement used in relations with the participation of consumers causes disputes related to the qualification of this agreement, its content, termination, invalidation. Due to the absence of a special law regulating legal relations under an option agreement outside the financial market, the norms of the Law of the Russian Federation “On Consumer Rights Protection” began to apply to them.

The purpose of the presented article is to substantiate the need to improve the design of an option agreement to prevent abuse of the right by the participants in these legal relations.

The study of the option contract was carried out on the basis of methods of system analysis, comparison, logical techniques, a special legal method of cognition of the phenomena of legal reality.

The article substantiates that the construction of an option contract can be used to form unfair terms of the contract. The problems of the lack of uniformity of judicial practice on certain issues related to the resolution of disputes on option contracts with the participation of consumers have been identified.

Based on the materials of judicial practice of arbitration courts and courts of general jurisdiction, the application of the provisions of Part 7 of Article 227 of the APC of the Russian Federation and Part 6 of Article 232.2 of the CPC of the Russian Federation is analyzed, according to which non-property claims submitted together with claims arising from civil legal relations and related to the category of cases subject to mandatory consideration in the said procedure are subject to consideration in simplified proceedings.

The study was undertaken in order to establish the orientation and effectiveness of these norms in terms of the result pursued by the legislator, fixing this rule, identifying law enforcement problems.

The methodological basis of the article consists of general scientific (analysis, synthesis, analogy, description, system) and private scientific methods (comparative legal, formal legal).

In the course of the study, the purpose of this legal provision is outlined, the absence of its uniform application in civil and arbitration processes is stated, the reasons for the law enforcement difficulties encountered by the courts are substantiated. In conclusion, proposals are made to improve the norms in order to increase their effectiveness and achieve uniformity in judicial practice.

The article is devoted to the consideration of one of the most pressing problems of our time – the fight against the use (inhalation) of non-narcotic intoxicating substances (sniffing) by minors. This harmful phenomenon is becoming more widespread among minors in all regions of the Russian Federation, causing irreparable harm to the life and health of children.

The authors analyzed statistical information on crimes committed by minors in a state of toxic intoxication, paid attention to the consideration of some urgent problems of the lack of legislative regulation of the activities of combating the use of non-narcotic intoxicating substances by minors.

The article analyzes the nature of the abuse of Russian labor law, which is a special type of offenses in labor law – violation of the general principles of law and the principles of Russian labor law. The analysis of judicial acts is carried out, which uses the concept of “abuse of law” and criticizes scientific approaches based on legal positivism, as well as on the scientific discussion concept of integrative legal understanding, in which the abuse of labor law is revealed with the help of social regulators of public relations as unfair and unreasonable actions of subjects of labor law. The author’s conclusions and proposals are formulated from the position of the scientifically grounded concept of integrative legal understanding. In particular, it is concluded that law enforcement should be carried out on the basis of legal regulators of labor relations, including on the general principles of law and the principles of Russian labor law.

Theoretical and practical questions about the recovery of alimony for minors have not lost their relevance in modern Russia, since the legal regulation of family relations is always in the focus of attention of the state and society. The application of this institution in practice sometimes leads to a misunderstanding of the norms of law. The analysis made it possible to identify problems, which serve as an impetus for the infringement of the rights of minors.

The goals and objectives of the study are to consider specific issues that arise when the guardianship and guardianship authority applies with a joint application for the recovery of alimony and restriction/deprivation of parental rights, as well as the possibility of reducing the amount of alimony for minors, provided for in Article 119 of the Family Code of the Russian Federation, if the payer»s financial or marital status has changed.

The research methodology is based on private scientific and general scientific methods: formal-legal, comparative-legal, structural analysis.

As a result of the study, it was noted that the obligation of parents to support their children is unconditional, it is necessary to develop a unified approach to the consideration of cases on the application of the guardianship and guardianship authority on the restriction of parental rights and the recovery of alimony at the same time. A proposal has been made aimed at eliminating the identified problems when changing the amount of alimony for minors: it is necessary to fix in Article 119 of the Family Code of the Russian Federation that the birth of a subsequent child or the lack of financial opportunity to pay alimony in themselves are not grounds for reducing the amount of alimony.