Articles

Values approach to the substance and interpretation of constitution originates from Weimar Germany and after World War II was adopted and applied by the Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) soon after it’s establishing. Declaring the constitution as “objective order of values” inspired legal scholars in Germany and abroad to develop the value theory of law and borrowed by courts of Brazil, South Africa, Israel, Venezuela and Russia. At the same time jurisprudence of values became an object of sharp critics, manifested in a book published in Germany in 1960 by Carl Schmitt — Tyranny of values and later developed by other authors. Opposing their arguments, author defenses the values method of constitutional interpretation and describes the features and specificity of thinking about constitution as a system of values. Author reasons that values are not aggressive, do not pretend to dominate over norms and principles and are not subjective. The author’s position supports the idea that values choice is not rational, while states that this does not impede to keep law certain and predictable — if the values, found by courts behind the legal norms and principles and applies in concrete cases, will be explicitly defined and consequently and non-contradictorily realized in judicial practice.

The relevance of the research is due to the rapid development of artificial intelligence technologies and their active introduction into the economic activities of a modern employer. This trend generates quite a few theoretical and practical issues in the field of labor law, especially taking into account the desire of the legislator to stimulate the widespread introduction of artificial intelligence technologies and adopt appropriate regulatory regulation in the foreseeable future. In the article, the author analyzes the practice of using artificial intelligence technologies in labor relations and comes to the conclusion that there is a need to improve domestic labor law. Based on a comprehensive analysis of the mechanisms of legal regulation of the digital economy, the author suggests possible approaches to improving labor law in the context of the development of artificial intelligence technologies. A general approach to improving labor law can be provided through the development and approval of strategic planning documents in the field of labor. The use of “smart regulation” methods, including legal experiments and public consultations, will allow assessing the effectiveness of various options for the proposed regulatory framework in advance. Finally, it seems reasonable to take into account the accumulated experience of applying “soft law”, in particular, the ideas contained in the Code of Ethics in the field of Artificial Intelligence.

This article is devoted to the legal analysis of the qualification of the armed conflict in the Donbass in the period from March 2014 to February 21, 2022, which is decisive for establishing the legal consequences entitled by this particular form of armed conflict. In order to establish the most objective legal assessment of this conflict, the positions of representatives of the Western and Ukrainian doctrines of international law are considered, as well as an analysis of historical facts and documents of international organizations. A study of Ukrainian and Western scientific sources showed the similarity of the positions of their authors in attempts to qualify armed conflict that took place in Donbass in the appointed time period, as international or as internationalized. At the same time, references either to propaganda editions, or to advertising and unproven events serve as an argument for such statements. At the same time, an analysis of the objective circumstances and the most authoritative documents of international organizations only casts doubt on the consistency of the material that those authors describe, but also casts to make completely different conclusions. Considering the approval of the Set of Measures for the Implementation of the Minsk Agreements by the UN Security Council, and also drawing the attention to the facts, it becomes obvious the non-international nature of the conflict in Donbass.

Throughout the XX–XXI centuries, the Russian criminal legislation, along with traditional provisions on instigation, contains norms that provide for independent (outside the framework of complicity) responsibility for public calls for the implementation of criminal activity. The article analyzes the views of the Russian theory of criminal law on the correlation of instigation with public incitement to commit specific criminal acts in the Criminal Code of 1903, counter-revolutionary and anti-Soviet agitation and propaganda provided for by Soviet criminal laws, as well as public calls for criminal activity in the current Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The existence of these norms in different historical periods is explained primarily by the actual limits (to a greater or lesser extent) of complicity and inchoate crimes. The expansion of the range of punishable acts primarily pursues the goal to protect the existing state system, public order and security. At the same time, the limits of such criminalization and the distinction between incitement and public appeals cannot be determined by a simple technical opposition of their features, but must be established by understanding the very concept of public appeals to commit certain criminal acts. The difficulties observed today in their differentiation are not in the least connected with the changing legislative constructions throughout the century, which predetermines the interest in their historical analysis.

Particular emphasis in the work is given to the lack of a legal definition of the concept of “provision of electric power transmission services” in the legislation. This does not allow us to determine the scope of the contract, as well as the content of the actions carried out in the provision of electric power transmission services. The question of the advisability of including a condition on the quality of electric power as an essential condition of the contract by analogy with an energy supply contract is considered. 

The work examines the general legal nature, differences from the agreement on technological connection, including parties “to the contract legal rights arising in the course of the contract, and its public and binding nature”. 

Despite the approach declared by law regarding the public nature of the contract, the procedure for sending an offer to conclude it does not comply with the rules established by the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on public contracts. In this regard, at the end of the work, proposals were formulated to improve the legislation when the agreement is concluded in the legal form of an adhesion agreement.