Articles

The purpose of the article is to substantiate the possibility of using the concept of “form of state unity”, which was introduced into scientific circulation by Oleg Ivanovich Chistyakov. To achieve this goal, the works of the scientist are analyzed, in which he reveals his views on this concept. It is noted that Chistyakov, in relation to historical and legal research, considered the concept of the form of the state adopted in theoretical and legal science to be not quite successful, not corresponding to the whole variety of historical experience of state development. The concept of a form of state unity makes it possible to synthesize not only the territorial factors of the existence of the state, but also the factor of the population, which is especially important in a multinational country. It is concluded that the concept of “form of state unity” proposed by O. I. Chistyakov may well be used in historical and legal studies. Further developments within the framework of this model will allow us to get a more accurate idea of the mechanisms used by the state authorities of the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union to preserve the national unity of the country in the face of numerous challenges. Moreover, of particular importance is the fact that this material is proposed for publication in the year of the 100th anniversary of the outstanding scientist, a representative of the glorious Moscow Law School, the pearl of which — Moscow University — will turn 270 years old in 2025!

The article sets and uses concrete examples to solve the problem of identifying of the directions of continuity in the development of the scientific heritage of Serafim Vladimirovich Yushkov by his students and followers. The contribution of the scientist to the development of the conceptual foundations of historical and legal science is shown. It is noted that S. V. Yushkov’s students continued to develop topics related to the integration of peoples within the Russian Empire and the USSR, and adhered to the approaches he developed to periodization and methodology of historical and legal research. It is revealed that at the end of the twentieth century, attempts were made in the domestic scientific and educational literature to revise a number of conceptual provisions of S. V. Yushkov’s scientific heritage, including on the issues of periodization of the course of the history of state and law, its spatial characteristics. It is concluded that the study of the state and law, culture and history of the peoples inhabiting the countries bordering Russia is of great practical importance, contributes to the development of a scientifically sound policy, allowing integrate neighbors within a single cultural and economic space. This indicates the continuing importance of S. V. Yushkov’s ideas in relation to the need to study the history of the state and the rights of the peoples of the post-Soviet space. The article emphasizes the political importance of studying the history of the state and law, which goes beyond the framework of jurisprudence.

This message is an extremely curious and valuable for the history of Moscow University recollection of one of its outstanding students — Veniamin Evgenievich Chirkin. It is especially important that these materials will be published on the pages of the Moscow University Bulletin on the eve of its 270th anniversary.

Transfer of certain governmental authority constituting the scope of public authorities’ competence, not assuming its general alienation, is a common pattern of our times and in legal science is referred to as “delegation”. This article is supposed to clarify the essence of “delegation” as a notion of constitutional law. For this purpose, delegation is considered as a specific constitutional law notion on the one hand and as a general legal notion traced back to the early legal sources such as Digest of Justinian on the other. Recognized as a separate notion, “delegation” is proposed to be considered with reference to such notions as “state”, “governmental authority”, “separation of powers” and others. Analysis of the notions mentioned above regard to the constitutional law context has made it possible to define delegation in the light of philosophical ideas about the essence of governmental authority and public entities to which it belongs. For instance, ascertaining that governmental authority exclusively belongs to a public-law entity (the state) allowed to designate a specific subject of constitutional delegation, which is neither sovereignty nor state power, but governmental authority shared between the separate branches of government. Besides descripting specific features of constitutional delegation, the article also provides some undermining them in recent decades trends, namely, legislative delegation (i. e. delegation of law-making authority by the legislature to the executive) and private delegation (i. e. delegation of governmental authority to nongovernmental entities).

This article is devoted to the issues of liability for criminal acts against justice in the criminal law of France and Germany. The authors examine the conceptual features of the model of criminal liability for criminal acts against justice in each of the specified legal orders. The article concludes that there are different approaches to establishing liability for criminal acts against justice in French and German criminal law. The French model of criminal liability for criminal encroachments on the interests of justice assumes the inclusion in the latter of not only the acts of individuals participating in legal proceedings, but also the acts of officials committed in connection with the administration of justice. Also, in the criminal law of France, criminal acts against the interests of justice include encroachments on the health and other benefits of both officials and individuals, if these acts are committed in connection with the administration of justice. The German model of criminal liability for criminal acts against justice is based on a narrow approach, according to which criminal attacks on justice are limited to acts of private individuals participating in various types of legal proceedings.

This article discusses the key conditions of liability of information intermediaries for violations of intellectual property rights. The presentation of the terms is accompanied not only by an analysis of judicial practice and legislative provisions, but also by a study of doctrinal views on the division of copyright and patent infringements into direct and indirect. Such a division of violations is uncharacteristic for the domestic legal consciousness, mainly the signs of this concept are found in the legislation of common law countries (UK, USA). However, it is possible to find similar features in Russian legislation, namely, in art. 1253.1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation “Specifics of the responsibility of an information intermediary”. The author explains how to distinguish an information intermediary from a user so that the information intermediary can prove his innocence. What actions can he use to do this? What can be considered necessary and sufficient measures to stop the infringement of intellectual property rights? The article also focuses on the model of civil liability of the information intermediary in order to facilitate understanding of the problem of independent responsibility of the information intermediary in relation to the responsibility of the direct user, or they will be jointly responsible for the violation of intellectual rights.