No 1 (2024)

A comparative legal study of problematic issues related to judicial practice and judicial law-making in Russia and the USA was carried out. It has been established that judicial law-making is recognized as a source of law. However, the most problematic and controversial is the question of its place in the system of sources of law. The study revealed that in practice, within the Anglo-Saxon legal system, it is often difficult to clearly define the boundary between common law precedents and statutory interpretation. Based on the results of the study, it is concluded that the judicial precedent in the United States, as well as in Russia, from the point of view of integrative legal understanding, still refers to “non-law”.

The article is devoted to the theoretical study of administrative and economic cases arising in decentralized spheres of control and supervisory relations as an objective category of administrative procedural law necessary for the construction and improvement on objective scientific grounds of the system of procedural forms of resolution of relevant extrajudicial administrative cases, as well as court administrative cases derived from them in order to ensure full protection of the rights of Russian citizens on the basis of balance of interests. In particular, approaches to the definition of the concept of administrative and economic affairs are substantiated, its most significant categories are identified, a set of theoretical conclusions and proposals is substantiated for practical purposes of improving legal regulation, judicial and extrajudicial law enforcement.

To successfully defend your rights in court, you should clearly understand the content and legal nature of the actions necessary for this. At the same time, the theory of civil procedure has not yet formed a unified approach to solving the question of what a civil process is, what elements it consists of.

Since the civil process is one of the types of legal activity, its primary element is the procedural action. Setting the goal of determining the structure of the civil process, it is necessary to determine not only the list of its constituent parts and their names, but also their spatial and temporal boundaries.

It should be noted that individual procedural actions cannot exist separately from each other, and therefore, the procedural form not only determines the order of their commission, but also combines them into a certain system. At the same time, the analysis of works devoted to the application of the system method in jurisprudence allowed us to conclude that the civil process is a set of various elements that are in relationships and connections with each other, forming a certain integrity, unity.

Thus, the primary element of the civil process is the procedural actions, which make up the stages and stages. At the same time, it is not necessary to consider the process itself as a chain of interconnected links going in order one after another. The civil process is rather a set of relatively isolated elements that can form various structural connections depending on the circumstances of a particular case. They can exist not only within certain stages or stages, but also beyond them.

The common property of the spouses may include shares or shares in the authorized capital of the company, therefore, various procedural problems related to family and corporate law arise in the practice of the courts.

Purpose of the work: on the basis of doctrinal and empirical analysis to resolve some procedural problems in the consideration and resolution of family-corporate disputes.

Brief conclusions. When considering a dispute on the division of a share in a company, the court should bring up for discussion the issue of the possibility of obtaining compensation for it, which can prevent further corporate disputes. The fact of the presence of a prohibitive clause in the charter of a legal entity should not be included in the subject of proof in a family dispute on the division of a shares. The presence of a court decision on the recognition of ownership of a part of the share and the disagreement of other participants in the corporation serves as the basis for paying the actual value of the shares. The spouse has the right to apply to the arbitration court to challenge the corporate decision if he violates his property right, but in this case an increased standard of proof will apply, since the plaintiff is obliged to provide indisputably evidence of the disagreement at the time of the legal actions, their economic inexpediency.

The purpose of the work is to analyze the current state of forensic examination as a branch of scientific knowledge and significant procedural activity and on its basis, taking into account new scientific achievements, to predict the directions of development of theoretical, procedural and methodological aspects of forensic expert activity. Research methods. The methodological basis of the work is general scientific and special methods of scientific cognition: dialectical method, formal logical method, comparative legal analysis of articles of legislation regulating forensic expert activity, as well as methods of comparison, interpretation of modern methods of expert research. The results of the study. The main trends in the development of forensic expert activity aimed at improving the legal, theoretical and methodological support of forensic examination are identified.

The article is devoted to the issues of infliction as a category of criminal law science. On the basis of the philosophical doctrine of causality, an attempt is made to resolve the problem of criminal law infliction through such concepts as “causal connection” and “causal relationship”. The author comes to the conclusion that infliction is an act which in some cases is criminal, in other cases – non-criminal; causal connection is a feature of the objective side of both criminal and non-criminal infliction, and causal relationship is an optional feature of the objective side of the corpus delicti of an offence with a substantive legislative construction.

The large-scale involvement of citizens in the functioning of the securities market is associated with a high investment risk. In connection with the emergence of disputable situations, citizens apply to the courts with various requirements, referring to the fact that they are consumers. At the same time, the courts are not always able to protect the rights of citizens since it is very problematic to prove the status of a consumer. This situation actualizes questions about the legal status of citizens in the securities market and the judicial protection of their rights.

The purpose of the study is to assess the judicial practice in disputes related to the participation of citizens in the securities market.

When writing this article, general scientific methods (system, functional, group of logical methods) and special legal methods (formal legal, legal modeling method) were applied.

The article describes the main approaches to the qualification of legal relations with the participation of citizens in the securities market, developed in judicial practice and doctrine. At the same time, it is concluded that judicial practice is based on the position that citizens in the securities market are not consumers. This approach can be seen in disputes arising from brokerage service agreements, agreements with traders, agreements with forex dealers, and trust management agreements. However, it seems that the question of the legal status of a citizen should not be decided a priori, not only depending on the type of contract, but also on the number and frequency of transactions in the securities market, on the volume of investment, on the risks taken and on other characteristics of the actual activity of the citizen.