Suchergebnisse

Introduction. The article examines the ambiguity of the terms 'scientist', 'research associate' etc. in Russia and abroad, indicates the absence of a clear, regulation-backed definition of the concept of 'scientist' and emphasises the imperfection of the doctrinal approach to defining this term, reflected in the model legislation in particular. The study aims to analyse the legal status of scientists in Russia and abroad, considering the regulatory ambiguity and the existence of numerous adjacent terms. Methods. The methodological basis of the study is represented both by general scientific methods and specialised (legal) methods, as well as a set of concepts, approaches and principles relevant to the legal regulation of the status of actors involved in research activity in Russia and abroad. We also use the comparative legal method, which helps us draw a parallel between the legal status of Russian and foreign scientists. In turn, the formal legal method gets applied while analysing the current legislation and doctrinal approaches to the legal meaning behind the term 'scientist' and adjacent categories. The methods used do have some notable limitations: for instance, it is impossible to fully apply the formal legal approach. Results and Discussion. Based on the results of the study and assessment of the opinions of researchers that have already discussed similar issues, we arrive at three main conclusions. Firstly, in order to make terminology legally unambiguous, clear distinctions must be drawn between the names of essential science-related professions: scientist, researcher, educator etc. Secondly, the development of international research collaboration requires unified global standards that determine the legal status of scientists. Thirdly, we suggest improving the system of science funding to prevent the 'drain' of research personnel. Conclusion. We emphasise that the ongoing modernisation of national legislation on science is already making progress in bringing the legal status of scientists in Russia in ...

The study of the constitutional and legal basis of the status of migrants will allow to determine and summarize the rights and obligations of these persons, which significantly affect the formation of legal social order. This article discusses the constitutional, legal and administrative basis of the status of migrants, regulated by the legislation of the Russian Federation. Considering the issue of the current state of the migration legislation of the Russian Federation, the theoretical aspect of migration as the mobilization of people to change their permanent residence is highlighted. The causes of this phenomenon and the classification of categories of migrants are determined. The definitions of external and internal migrants are differentiated, on the basis of which the constitutional norms of foreign persons who entered the territory of the Russian Federation are further studied. According to Federal laws, the basic rights and obligations of immigrants who entered the Russian Federation for different definitions of reasons and circumstances are distinguished. The article considers the administrative and legal basis of the status of migrants in the context of a violation of the rule of law according to the norms of the Code of administrative violations. The Institute of citizenship is singled out as a status that directly affects the scope of individual rights and freedoms, which allows it to be singled out as a special status of a migrant. In conclusion, the above topic is summarized

Cover-title. ; First ed. published the same year under title: Polnoe sobranīe podrobnykh programm sushchestvui︠u︡shchikh russkikh politicheskikh partīĭ. ; Mode of access: Internet.

This article is devoted to the study of the legal status of homeless citizens based on the analysis of legal acts at the international and federal levels. The analysis of the federal documents has shown that the Russian legislative framework contains regulations in which homeless people are subjected to legal discrimination due to lack of registration at their place of residence.

В результате Петровских реформ в Российской империи появились категории населения, представители которых не входили в то или иное сословие. Для их определения в законодательных актах и делопроизводственных документах были введены в оборот такие термины, как «однодворец», «разночинец». Данная статья посвящена определению правового положения однодворцев как специфической категории населения Российской империи. В ней рассматриваются основные проблемы и противоречия, связанные с путями приобретения статуса однодворцев, эволюцией его правового обеспечения, выявлением состава однодворцев, определением их прав и обязанностей. Посредством фактического материала автором подтверждается основное противоречие статуса однодворцев, связанное с его двойственностью. С одной стороны, они приравнивались к крестьянам в том, что были обязаны платить подушную подать в равном размере с принадлежавшими им крестьянами, нести ландмилицкую (пограничную) службу и вести общинный образ жизни, а с другой – обладали правами дворянского состояния, а именно – правом владения крестьянами и землей. Другим противоречием было то, что права благородного сословия для однодворцев были ограничены: купля-продажа (а также иное распоряжение) крестьян и земли была им запрещена. Автор приходит к выводу, что противоречивость правового статуса однодворцев явилась следствием неоднородности этой категории населения, связанной с существованием множества путей к ее пополнению, а также сложности для власти в определении функций данного сословия, менявшихся с течением времени. Проблемы были связаны с отмиранием необходимости содержания ландмилицких полков (традиционной основной гражданской обязанностью однодворцев): в новых условиях власти требовалось четко определить статус данной категории населения, однако ни понизить его до крестьянского, ни повысить до дворянского она не могла, опасаясь критики и недовольства как дворян, так и самих однодворцев. Однодворцам была предоставлена возможность пополнить купеческое сословие, лишаясь при этом земли, а после 1762 г. – и дворянское сословие, увеличивая прослойку мелкопоместного дворянства. Таким образом, однодворцы были промежуточной податной категорией российского общества, находившейся между дворянством и государственным крестьянством, в более точном положении которой к началу XIX в. власть не определилась.
As a result of Peter the Great's reforms, some categories of the population whose representatives were not included into any social estate appeared in the Russian Empire. To denote them in legislative acts and office documents, the terms odnodvorets (plural odnodvortsy) and raznochinets (plural raznochintsy) were introduced. This article is devoted to the determination of the legal status of the odnodvortsy as a specific category of population of the Russian Empire. It examines the main problems and contradictions related to the ways of acquiring the status of odnodvorets, the evolution of its legal definition, the composition of the odnodvortsy, and the determination of their rights and obligations. By means of factual material, the author confirms the main contradiction of the odnodvortsy status, associated with its duality. On the one hand, odnodvortsy were equated with peasants as they were obliged to pay a poll tax in the same amount as the peasants who belonged to them did, to do landmilitia (frontier) service, and to lead a communal life. On the other hand, they had the rights of the noble estate, namely, the right to own peasants and land. Another contradiction was that the rights of the noble estate were limited for the odnodvortsy: the purchase and sale (as well as other disposal) of peasants and land were prohibited to them. The author comes to the conclusion that the inconsistency of the legal status of the odnodvortsy was a consequence of the heterogeneity of this category of the population, associated with the existence of many ways to replenish it and the difficulty for the authorities in determining the functions of this social estate, which changed over time. The problems were connected with the dying out need to maintain landmilitia regiments (the traditional main civic duty of the odnodvortsy): in the new conditions, the authorities needed to clearly determine the status of this category of population, but they could neither lower it to peasants nor raise it to the nobility, fearing criticism and discontent of both the noblemen and the odnodvortsy themselves. Odnodvortsy were given an opportunity to join the merchant estate, losing land in doing so, and after 1762 they were given an opportunity to join the nobility, thus increasing the stratum of gentry. Thus, the odnodvortsy were an intermediate taxable category of Russian society whose place in social structure was between the nobility and the state peasants. By the beginning of the 19th century, the authorities had not determined the status of the Odnodvortsy more precisely.

В статье анализируются некоторые нормы Федерального закона от 22 ноября 2016 г. N 396-ФЗ «О внесении изменений в Федеральный закон «О физической культуре и спорте в Российской Федерации» в части регулирования спорта высших достижений и профессионального спорта». Впервые в федеральном законе регламентируется правовой статус спортивного агента, ранее агентская деятельность в сфере спорта регулировалась исключительно локально-корпоративными актами, принимаемыми на базе крупных спортивных организаций. В настоящее время правовое положение спортивного агента носит незавершенный характер. Наряду с правами и обязанностями описываются спортивные санкции, и лишь частично существует уголовная ответственность. Не предусмотрена административная и уголовная ответственность за незаконное участие в азартных играх, в том числе в букмекерских конторах и тотализаторах спортивных агентов, спортсменов, спортивных судей, тренеров, руководителей спортивных команд и других участников официальных спортивных соревнований. Доказывается необходимость включения спортивного агента в число самостоятельных субъектов ответственности за оказание противоправного влияния на результат официального спортивного соревнования или зрелищного коммерческого конкурса, поскольку по существующей интерпретации норм он может выступать лишь соучастником преступления, закрепленного ст. 184 Уголовного кодекса Российской Федерации. В порядке правотворчества законодателю предлагается ликвидировать отмеченные пробелы в административном и уголовном законах. ; The article analyses certain provisions of the Federal Law of November 22, 2016 no 396-FZ «On the Amendments to the Federal Law 'On Physical Culture and Sport in the Russian Federation' in the Part of Regulation of Sports of the Higher Achievements and Professional Sports». For the first time the Federal Law regulates the legal status of sports agent. The Agency activities in the sports field used to be regulated exclusively by local corporate acts adopted on the basis of the major sports organizations. Currently, the legal status of sports agent is inconclusive. Alongside with the rights and responsibilities sporting sanctions are described, and there is (only partially) criminal liability. The administrative and criminal liability for illegal participation in games of chance is not provided, which includes betting offices and totalizators sports agents, as well as the sportsmen, sports judges, trainers, heads of sports teams and other participants of official sports competitions. The paper argues the need to include a sports agent in the number of independent subjects of responsibility for the provision of illegal influence on the results of official sports competitions and entertainment commercial contest. According to the existing interpretation of the rules, they can be only an accomplice in the crimes enshrined in article 184 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In the procedure of law making, the legislator is requested to eliminate the deficiencies in the administrative and criminal laws.

With appendix, brief outline of explanations and important orders on labor. (Practical commentary) By E.N. Danilov. ; Mode of access: Internet.

The article deals with historical legal analysis of activity of the lawyer in Russia and France. The purpose of this article is to examine the development of the legal profession in Russia and France, as well as their differences. Revealing the purpose of this publication should indicate that it is considered the most important historical periods which influenced the development of advocacy, authority, status and activities of lawyers.

Раздел I «Актуальные проблемы международного частного права» ; Статья анализирует правовой статус государственных страховщиков, предоставляющих страхование политических рисков национальным инвесторам. Автор изучил особенности страховщиков, включая их правовое положение, роль, которую они играют в национальной экономике, цели и задачи их деятельности. Автор выявил различия между публичным и частным сегментами рынка страхования политических рисков и определил специфику деятельности государственных страховщиков. Автор пришел к выводу, что страхование политических рисков государственными страховщиками направлено не только на покрытие финансовых потерь национальных инвесторов, на распространение среди инвесторов стандартов защиты окружающей среды, соблюдение прав работников и борьбе с коррупцией и на приток прямых инвестиций в принимающее государство. = This article focuses on legal status of state insurance companies which provide investment insurance against various political risks. The author reviews main features of these agencies including their legal status, role in national economy, specific goals of their activity. The research also analyzes the distinctions between of the public and private segments of the political risk insurance market and identifies the specific role of state investment guarantee agencies which they play in national economy. Political risk insurance guarantees the payment of coverage to the investor, mitigates risks of his substantial financial losses and encourages him to invest into developing countries with more risky business environment. Political risk insurance is an effective tool to minimize risks of investor's financial losses in a host state. Thus political risk insurance and the activity of state insurers promote investment flows to developing countries.

The article analyzes the legal status of universities and research organizations in the context of their technology transfer activities. The author deines the legal content of the technology transfer concept and analyses regulatory provisions governing the disposal of intellectual property rights. The importance of an "exclusive right" both for the theory of law and for the practice of intellectual property protection is emphasized. It is argued that examination of only the general provisions of the law, which grants exclusive rights, is not suicient to reveal legal problems of technology transfer in the sphere of science and education. In the analysis of legal identity of universities and research organizations as economic entities the two types of legal provisions are considered. The irst group of norms regulate activity of publicly funded and autonomic institutions in Russia. The second group consists of speciic norms devoted to the functioning of scientiic organizations and universities. The key legal barriers to technology transfer between research sector and industry are identiied. The major milestones in evolution of the legal and regulatory environment in the ield are highlighted. The focal points of the national policy concerning distribution of intellectual property rights for publicly inanced developments of universities and research organizations are described. The author reveals the main drawbacks of the current legislative framework that determine legal status of scientiic and higher education organizations as economic entities are revealed. The author draws attention to the developments in intellectual property law, which can provide additional legal instruments to facilitate commercialization of scientiic research output of universities and scientiic organizations. The successful experience of foreign countries is used to justify introduction of these legal instruments in the Russian legislation framework.

The article deals with issues related to the regulation of personal non-proprietary relations of parents and children, which are relevant at the present time as they provide the child with legal protection and the realization of opportunities. The main attention is paid to the issue of determining the child's citizenship under the laws of the Russian Federation and foreign law if there is a foreign element, which is applied when establishing the legal status of the child, which connects it with the state, giving the said person political and legal status of a citizen who distinguishes him from foreign citizens and stateless persons, in each case with a set of rights and obligations and responsibilities. Often, this status remains insufficiently regulated in the legislation of foreign countries, as well as in domestic law. It covers an issue related to the law applied when a conflict arises when establishing and disputing the child's origin from specific parents in the presence of a foreign element in foreign and Russian legislation, which often causes certain difficulties in establishing and disputing this fact, conferring on those persons mutual rights and obligations and depriving their rights and obligations. The provisions contained in foreign legislation must be used in the law–enforcement practice of the Russian Federation. The establishment of paternity (maternity) is considered in the article as a legal act and as a way to protect the rights of the child, since if the claim is satisfied, the violated rights of the said person are restored: the right to live and be brought up in a family, to know their parents. The Institute of the legalization of children born out of wedlock is considered, which has wide application in foreign legislation and is relevant for fixing in Russian law.

The article provides a comparative analysis of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms regarding ensuring the observance of legal status of citizens and other social subjects. The same is done with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights as well as the Venice Commission Report on the Rule of Law. Special attention has been drawn to the fact that the result of analysis focused on fundamental international documents on the protection of human rights and the Report of the Venice Commission can be used during development of certain powers of the President of Ukraine, the prosecution office and the whole system of anti-criminal agencies regarding effective, rational and qualitative perception, recognition, ensuring and observance of legal status of social subjects, operative prevention of its violation and a full restoration of violated legal status "whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law" as stated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. And this precaution established in the preamble of the Universal Declaration should be basis for international and national regulation of effective, rational and qualitative perception, recognition, ensuring and observance of legal status of individuals and social subjects and a full restoration of violated legal status. This approach is supported by scientific school of Professor Alankir to solve the major current problems.

Includes legislation of Lithuania. ; Izd. Imp. Obshchestva istorii i drevnosteĭ rossiĭskikh pri Moskovskom Universiteti͡e. ; Xerox copy; Ann Arbor, University Microfilms, 1974. ; Mode of access: Internet.

The article discusses the study of the legal status of collective subjects of scientific activity. The relevance of the research is predetermined by the importance of the qualitative organization of the work of collective subjects of scientific activity in order to achieve the most effective scientific results. The research methodology includes general methods of scientific research – systemic, logical, historical, as well as special methods, including comparative legal and formal legal. The formal legal method makes it possible to analyze the legal terminology on the research topic above. The method of comparative legal research allows us to compare different points of view and highlight the main problems of legal regulation of collective subjects of scientific law. The research includes three main stages: (1) – terminological analysis of the terminology used by the legislator; (2) – critical analysis of the legal definitions proposed by the legislator and the identification of the problems of legal regulation arising in this connection; (3) – comparison of controversial opinions and determination of ways to improve scientific legislation. The main problems identified are the uncertainty in the delimitation of the statuses of related collective subjects of scientific work, as well as the mixing of scientific and educational functions of these organizations. As a result of the study, the authors have come to the conclusion that it is necessary to improve legislation aimed at regulating the legal status of scientific organizations and other collective subjects of scientific law. ; Статья посвящена исследованию правового статуса коллективных субъектов научной деятельности. Актуальность исследования предопределена важностью качественной организации работы коллективных субъектов научной деятельности в целях достижения наиболее эффективных научных результатов. Методология исследования включает общие методы научного исследования – системный, логический, исторический, а также специальные методы, среди которых сравнительно-правовой и формально-юридический. Формально-юридический метод позволяет провести анализ легальной терминологии по заявленной теме исследования. Метод сравнительно-правового исследования позволяет сопоставить различные точки зрения и выделить основные проблемы правового регулирования коллективных субъектов научного права. Исследование включает три основных этапа: (1) – терминологический анализ используемой законодателем терминологии; (2) –критический анализ предложенных законодателем легальных определений и выявление возникающих в связи с этим проблем правового регулирования; (3) – сопоставление дискуссионных мнений и определение путей совершенствования научного законодательства. Основными выявленными проблемами являются неопределенность в разграничении статусов смежных коллективных субъектов научной деятельности, а также смешение научных и образовательных функций этих организаций. В результате проведенного исследования авторы приходят к выводу о необходимости совершенствования законодательства, направленного на регулирование правового статуса научных организаций и иных коллективных субъектов научного права.