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.

The scientific heritage of Professor, Doctor of Law M. K. Treushnikov continues to be relevant for various systems of legal regulation. The sphere of regulation of insolvency (bankruptcy) relations is no exception, reflecting not only the need for clear resolution of legal disputes, but also the tasks related to the effective distribution of the debtor’s property and protection of creditors’ rights. The issues of evidence in such cases are of particular importance, as they determine the fairness and transparency of decisions. This article analyses the main provisions of M. K. Treushnikov’s theory of evidence, their practical implementation in bankruptcy cases and the significance of these approaches for improving the efficiency of court proceedings. The author analyses the adaptation and application of M. K. Treushnikov’s ideas in domestic judicial practice, including the use of presumptions, disclosure of evidence and standards for its evaluation. The article also focuses on procedural tools that allow courts to maintain objectivity and transparency in resolving conflicts between parties. The author emphasises the universality of the approaches proposed by the scholar, noting their importance for legal science in the context of permanent development of insolvency court practice.

Criminology has established categories and concepts, this is its language, which should be used correctly by all criminologists, both researchers of relevant issues and law enforcement officers. These categories and concepts have their own interpretation, which reflects their place in the system of forensic concepts, as well as their place in the structures of scientific and practical research. For this reason, their correct use ensures the objectification of conclusions based on the results of these studies. In modern criminology, there are objective problems associated with attempts to formulate the concepts of “crime mechanism” and “criminalistic characteristics of crimes” in research, their place in the system of concepts of the theory of criminology and methods of crime investigation. The study of the concepts of “crime mechanism” and “criminalistic characteristics of crimes”, the content of these concepts, allowed us to substantiate their correspondence in the system of concepts of criminology as a science. The established attitude indicates that these concepts are different in their essence and their elementary systemic content cannot, in one way or another, be suppressed. In the system of investigation methodology, the relation of these concepts can be expressed by the correspondence “crime mechanism” — criminalistic characteristics of crimes” due to the different methodological purpose of these concepts.

The article provides a comparative analysis of the consideration of the sovereignty of the state from the point of view of international and constitutional law. The differences in understanding the impact of international law and constitutional norms on sovereignty are highlighted and erroneous approaches to this issue are identified, which consist in seeking recognition of the limitation of state sovereignty, denying its constitutional origin and the result of the institutionalization of national sovereignty and statehood. Thus, the author comes to conclusions about the application of completely different criteria to the assessment of sovereignty by international and constitutional law. The author finds no reason to conclude that sovereignty is limited both in international relations, for example, when joining an international organization, and in constitutional relations from the point of view of constitutionalism. From this point of view, the author examines and compares existing approaches to the reception of international law norms in the national legal system in a new way. The author comes to conclusion that, considering modern trends in the development of law, the theoretical concepts of monism and dualism do not exist in their pure form in practice, regardless of which approach to the reception of international law norms is fixed at the constitutional level.

The article examines the trends and main results of the development of research in the field of legal informatics, information and digital law at the Faculty of Law of Lomonosov MSU. It is noted that the designation of Moscow University as the lead organization for scientific issues of information security of a humanitarian nature contributed to the intensification of research in the field of information law and information security, as well as the participation of the Faculty of Law from 1998 to 2010 in the implementation of MSU projects. The results of interdisciplinary legal research obtained over 25 years were introduced into the educational process of the Faculty of Law, the Higher School of Public Audit of Moscow State University and the Faculty of Computational Mathematics and Cybernetics of Moscow State University in the form of new curricula and courses. An interdisciplinary approach was incorporated into the structure of the courses taught in the interfaculty master’s program “Information Legal Relations in the Innovative Economy”, opened in 2016 at the Faculty of Law of Moscow State University. 

In the context of the formation of a digital economy, a new branch of law is simultaneously being created — digital law, which has its own subject of legal regulation. This process cannot be ignored, since “cross-cutting technologies” in the digital economy require legal regulation and protection of information during their use. Legal scholars are increasingly debating the well-known legal structures and the possibility of their use in new conditions, for example, the use of artificial intelligence technology. Certainly, the formation of the scientific apparatus and concept of digital law requires coordination of efforts in conducting interdisciplinary scientific research.