Articles

The article deals with the problem related to the definition of the content of the category “unlawful interest” in relation to liability insurance. In Russian law, the question of the content of an illegal interest becomes especially relevant, since the lack of an answer to it leads to the inability to insure the costs associated with the application of administrative liability measures in the form of monetary fines to policyholders, which significantly limits the possibilities of developing insurance as a financial institution. The article notes that not in all legal systems the use of insurance is limited by establishing a ban on insuring illegal interests, as is the case in Russia by virtue of paragraph 1 of Art. 928 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. For these purposes, in addition to the direct prohibition of insuring illegal interests, a public order structure may be used that prevents the execution of an insurance contract in cases where such a contract violates public order. The author notes that despite the attempts of Russian scientists to determine what an unlawful interest is, according to the paragraph 1 of art. 928 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the answer to this question remains open and comes to the conclusion that it is impossible to determine the exhaustive content of the illegal insurance interest, because this category always implies the discretion of the court. However, for the purposes of practical determination of cases when the insurance interest is unlawful, it is necessary to be guided by the criteria developed by the doctrine and judicial practice for transactions that violate public interests, and in each specific case to assess whether the liability insurance contract violates public interests or not.

Obligations arising as a result of causing harm in the course of a counterterrorist operation remain poorly studied in the domestic doctrine to a certain extent. Meanwhile, in practice, more and more difficulties arise due to the lack of compensation for causing this kind of harm. The reason for this is the incorrect qualification of the relationship, as a result of which the interest of the victim often remains unsatisfied. The article attempts to identify and resolve problems in compensation for harm caused by a counter-terrorist operation. The main difficulties are connected, firstly, with the definition of the defendant, secondly, with the refusal of compensation, since the procedure established in the laws was not observed, thirdly, with the determination of the legal nature of compensation for causing such harm, and, finally, with compensation for non-pecuniary damage. As a result, the author comes to the following conclusions: (1) the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation acts as a defendant in such disputes, while compensation for harm should be made at the expense of the federal budget; (2) non-compliance with the formal procedure is not an unconditional obstacle to refusing to compensate for lawfully caused harm, since the legal nature of compensation provided for by law and direct compensation for harm are different; (3) the victim retains the right to claim compensation for harm caused by a counter-terrorist operation, despite the statu- tory compensation received; (4) the victim has the right to compensate for non-pecuniary damage.

The author defines the features of the civil legal regime of the animal and qualifies the behavior of the animal depending on its legal regime. The significance of this study is that it allows us to answer the question of responsibility for harm caused by animals. In the article, the author refers to the sources of Roman law, and shows the formation of ideas about the behavior of an animal in domestic law. The author explores the judicial practice in which the legal qualification of animal behavior is carried out. The author identifies cases and grounds for bringing to responsibility for the harm caused by the animals of their owners, critically assesses the recognition of animal husbandry as an activity that poses an increased danger to others. The author evaluates the right of subjects to refer to phenomena related to animals as grounds for exemption from liability for violation of an obligation. The author concludes that the legal consequences of animal behavior differ depending on the legal regime of the animal (wild and located in the natural habitat, wild, removed from the natural habitat, domestic). The author examines legal consequences of animal diseases (epizootics) for the owner of animals and other persons.

The article discusses the issues of possible reform of the higher education system in Russia in general and legal education in particular. The prerequisites for such a reform are analyzed and the opinions expressed on this matter by representatives of state authorities, the scientific community, public organizations, proposals for a possible rejection of the “Bologna system” (a two-level education system) are considered. On the example of legal education provided by the Faculty of Law of Lomonosov Moscow State University. The advantages and disadvantages of the “Bologna system” are identified, the goals and principles of higher legal education are determined, the requirements for the structure of educational programs are formulated, the advantages of integrated training of lawyers (integrated magistracy) are substantiated compared with the specialty and the current two-level bachelor’s and master’s degree system. The article pays special attention to the need to ensure fundamental nature in legal education, the formation of scientific and pedagogical schools, indicates the need to maintain continuity in the reform of higher education, taking into account the interests of persons who have graduated in the field of Law in different periods. The authors also touch upon the problems of rating law schools and raise the question of the expediency of codifying legislation on education in the way of fulfilling the task of providing the necessary legal support for the implementation of educational programs.

The review discusses a recent publication dedicated to the history of the Russian Constitution Court, its formation and evolution. The book is one-of-a-kind in the sense that it meticulously reveals the stages of transformation of constitutional justice in Russia. The authors present a rich historical and legal material — from the Orders of Catherine II, inspired by the ideas of the Enlightenment, until the aftermath of the constitutional reform 2020 — in a lively and thrilling manner. A balanced academic approach has enabled the authors to demonstrate the whole variety of viewpoints that exist in the literature regarding various aspects of the formation, organization and activities of the Constitutional Court of Russia. Overall, the book shows the specific features of the Russian model of constitutional justice, its role in the legal order and the peculiarities of its interaction with other actors. The book raises questions regarding the meaning and consequences of numerous transformations of the system of constitutional review that have taken place in Russia. Particularly, it identifies the risks associated with the large-scale reform of 2020, and highlights the challenges that the Court is facing in the aftermath of the latest transformation.

Today, scientific discussions are gaining strength all over the world concerning the problems of determining truly effective forms and methods of legal regulation of social power, which is provided by the possession of gigantic global data arrays accumulated, analyzed and used in a digital network environment. In fact, modern technologies make it possible to build, on the basis of this kind of data, perfectly disguised algorithmic mechanisms for information management of the behavior of both the masses of people and each individual user of the modern Global Network. The existing legal environment turned out to be unprepared for a real solution to such problems — not only because it did not comprehend them doctrinally in time, but also because it turned out to be unprepared from an instrumental and technological point of view. The existing forms and methods of legal regulation (the current provisions of regulations and sanctions for their violation) are almost universally ignored by the real subjects of digital network media power (that is, the «digital class» of aggregators, owners and administrators of «big data»). Apparently, the time has come to regulate digital network media power with the help of a digital, network software and hardware legal environment adequate to its nature of online control, analysis of situations and making legal decisions (including in real time). The technical and technological means that make up this environment will not replace lawyers), just as neither typewriters nor computers have replaced the head and hand of a writer.

The article is devoted to the change in the legal status of landed estate of the Polish gentry in nine western provinces of the Russian Empire in the 19th century. The author draws on extensive regulatory and legal material and archival documents illustrating the reasons for the adoption of exemptions from the general guidelines on ownership and mortgage for the gentry, whose representatives received Russian citizenship after the “Kingdom of Poland” joining Russia in 1815. After two uprisings in the thirties and sixties of the XIXth century, persons of Polish nationality were recognized as unreliable subjects. A restriction of rights was introduced upon this strata to maintain order in the border lands of the Russian Empire. In this regard, the concept of “a person of Polish origin” was introduced into the legal acts, which did not apply to Catholics in general, but only to Poles and those Western natives who acquired Polish nationality. Thus, persons of Polish nationality constituted a group of subjects identified on a national basis, which was also associated with a confessional one. The analysis of the materials allows concluding that the supremacy of the interests of the state, expressed in the infringement of the rights of a social group identified as unreliable, was an effective method of state building and part of the strategy for protecting the interests of the Russian Empire.

The article makes a reasoned analysis of damages’ legal nature, provides arguments against the most common point of view in the academic and educational literature that damages are a measure of civil liability of a universal nature, which implies the establishment of the composition of a civil offense. The point of view that damages are unfavorable sanction for non-compliance with the obligation is criticized. An attempt is made to bring together damages as an economic category (negative balance as a result of summing up mutual claims of the parties to the legal relationship) and damages as a legal notion (damages as a way of civil law protection from negative property consequences of one of the parties based on existence of duty). The author adheres to a broader concept of risk distribution: negative consequences imposed on non-beneficiary of the victim’s estate may be based on not only defendant’s unlawful actions or inaction, but also on other grounds provided for by law, contract or principles of law, this makes it possible to expand the scope of application of this institution and explains the numerous examples of damages available in the legislation in the absence of an offense and grounds for the application of liability measures.

The question of finding the best option for ensuring the rights of persons against whom criminal prosecution is actually carried out has a long history, one way or another arises in many legal orders. Over the entire period of discussion of this problem, various mechanisms for its resolution were formulated, some of which were implemented at the legislative level and brought a significant positive effect. However, despite the variability of specific approaches, the task of properly guaranteeing the rights of criminally prosecuted persons is not removed from the agenda. Moreover, following the development of criminal procedure institutions, the improvement of forms and methods of combating crime, a complex of contradictions associated with the observance of the rights of alleged offenders also evolves. Thus, one can note the cyclical nature of the existing discussions, the degree of which rises from time to time. The Russian criminal procedure doctrine is currently in the phase of active discussion of this issue. In this regard, within the framework of the article, an attempt was made to evaluate the existing proposals, to understand why numerous ideas do not achieve a positive result, and in the end to answer the question of the advisability of continuing scientific research in this area.

This article, based on the achieved level of development of the theory and practice of prosecutorial supervision, which has proved its position in legal reality as an independent branch of law and a field of scientific knowledge, examines the current aspects of the improving of the legal regulation of the activity of the prosecutor’s office of the Russian Federation as the most important state–legal institution. It is recommended that, among the sources of information necessary for this purpose, specifically refer to the results of historical and legal analysis of the evolution of the formation of legislation on the prosecutor’s office, materials of scientific research, legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on cases of examining the constitutionality of laws, both directly related to the activity of the prosecutor’s office, and other regulations related to its professional activity. The article highlights, within acceptable limits, the provisions essential for ensuring, according to the authors, proper legal regulation of the position, significance and content of the purpose and types of tasks on which the completeness, certainty and efficiency of the final results of the prosecutor’s office depend. In line with the provisions of the Law of the Russian Federation “On the Amendment to the Constitution of the Russian Federation” № 1-FKZ, March 14, 2020, the considerations on the legislative solution of the problem of the functions of the prosecutor’s office, possible counter-arguments addressed to the potential opponents of the multifunctional nature of the Russian prosecutor’s office are outlined. The article pays some attention to the issues of legal regulation of the powers of prosecutors, service in the prosecutor’s office