Suchergebnisse

The subject. The legal status of self-regulatory organizations based on the principle of mandatory membership was chosen as the subject of the research.The purpose of the article is to study the features of subjects of administrative law, vested with public powers, and substantiate the possibility of attribution of self-regulatory organizations with mandatory membership to legal entities of public law.The methodological basis for the study: general scientific methods (analysis, synthesis, comparison, description) as well as formal-legal interpretation of legislation and judicial acts.Results, scope of application. Two types of subjects can take part in administrative relations, as a rule: subjects performing public functions and endowed with authority for their implementation, and subjects not endowed with appropriate powers and representing an exclusively private interest. At the same time, the first group of subjects includes not only public-territorial entities, state authorities, but also organizations performing publicly significant functions.The legal definition of a legal entity does not reflect all the features of the legal status of these subjects, that is why the author refers to the concept of a legal entity of public law. Legal entities of public law have a special nature, different from legal entities of private law, since they have the right to make decisions affecting an indefinite range of persons.Conclusions. The analysis of the features of the legal entity of public law allocated in the literature (special legal nature; special social quality; special interests and will; connection with the public power; special way of creation; public-legal character of responsibility) allowed to justify that self-regulatory organizations are the kind of legal entities of public law - organizations performing publicly significant functions. ; Рассмотрены особенности субъектов административного права, наделенных публичными полномочиями. Отмечается, что в указанную группу входят не только публично-территориальные образования, органы государственной власти, но и организации, осуществляющие публично значимые функции, все особенности правового статуса которых не отражаются легальным определением юридического лица. Автор обращается к концепции юридического лица публичного права, обладающего особой сущностью, отличной от юридических лиц частного права, поскольку вправе принимать решения, затрагивающие неопределенный круг лиц. Посредством анализа выделяемых в литературе признаков юридического лица публичного права (особая правовая природа; особое социальное качество; особые интересы и воля; связь с публичной властью; особый способ создания; публично-правовой характер ответственности) обосновывается отнесение саморегулируемых организаций к их числу.

The subject. A number of areas of professional activity in which there is mandatory self-regulation in the Russian Federation were selected: construction (as well as engineering surveys, architectural and structural design), the activities of arbitration managers. The purpose of the article is to study the experience of foreign countries in the field of self-regulation. The study took into account the following aspects of regulation of professional activity: features of the regulatory framework, the presence or absence of professional associations that develop standards and rules of activity, especially membership in them. In addition, the experience of regulation of medical activity as an example of the industry, which in Russia is actively discussed the feasibility of introducing mandatory self-regulation.The methodological basis for the study: general scientific methods (analysis, synthesis, comparison, description); private and academic (interpretation, formal-legal). Economically developed countries were taken, where self-regulation in certain areas have been existing for several decades: the United States, Britain, Germany, France, Italy, Japan, Canada.Results, scope. The activities of self-regulatory organizations abroad are regulated by industry legislation, a special law on self-regulatory organizations, as a rule, there is no. In contrast to the Russian practice, the emergence and further development of self-regulatory organizations abroad is not in direct connection with the emergence of mandatory legislation on mandatory membership in the self-regulating organizations. In industries with a high degree of danger to third parties (construction, medical activities), in most countries, the system of state licensing is still maintained, which deserves a positive assessment and should be taken into account by the legislator when choosing areas of activity in which state licensing should be replaced by mandatory self-regulation. In some foreign countries, representatives of consumers are included in the bodies of self-regulatory organizations along with representatives of the professional community, which deserves a positive assessment and can also be used in Russian practice.Conclusions. Two models of self-regulation are used in foreign practice: voluntary and mandatory. In the case of mandatory self-regulation in foreign countries, as a rule, there is one self-regulating organization, which has the status of a national one. It is obvious that the state control exercised over one self-regulating organization is more effective and less costly than for many of them. Therefore, the experience of foreign countries concerning the transfer of powers to a single self-regulatory organization in the case of mandatory self-regulation should be used in the Russian practice. ; Рассматриваются актуальные вопросы обеспечения деятельности саморегулируемых организаций в зарубежных странах. В качестве объекта исследования выбран ряд сфер профессиональной деятельности, в которых в Российской Федерации существует обязательное саморегулирование: строительство (а также инженерные изыскания, архитектурно-строительное проектирование), деятельность арбитражных управляющих. С точки зрения географии, были взяты экономически развитые страны, в которых саморегулирование в отдельных сферах существует несколько десятилетий: Соединенные Штаты Америки, Великобритания, Германия, Франция, Италия, Япония, Канада.При изучении опыта зарубежных стран принимались во внимание следующие аспекты регулирования профессиональной деятельности: особенности нормативной основы деятельности, наличие либо отсутствие профессиональных объединений, разрабатывающих стандарты и правила деятельности, особенности членства в них.Кроме того, исследовался опыт регулирования медицинской деятельности как примера отрасли, относительно которой в России активно обсуждается целесообразность введения обязательного саморегулирования.Анализ зарубежного опыта в сфере саморегулирования позволил сформулировать предложения по дальнейшему совершенствованию системы саморегулирования в Российской Федерации.