Suchergebnisse

The development of alternative dispute resolution procedures raises a number of new problems and questions for jurisprudence and legal practice. Many of these are closely related to the implementation of mediation procedures. Significant attention has been paid in the legal literature to the need for mediators' legal education. Nowadays a professional lawyer usually performs the functions of a mediator. Nevertheless, in some countries the competence of mediators can be limited. In fact, such persons may be prohibited from providing any legal assistance to the parties. A direct prohibition of this kind exists in Russian legislation. To what degree is this prohibition realistic and reasonable? Different countries enjoy different approaches to the possibility of providing disputing parties with a mediator's legal assistance in addressing issues requiring legal advice or in the drafting of legal documents. Different approaches to this issue have appeared for various reasons. The absence of consensus is caused by a contradiction between the principle of mediator neutrality in the conflict resolution process and the goals of dispute settlement in which a legally competent intermediary is involved. To ensure the effectiveness of the mediation process, legislators should seek out more flexible ways of regulating procedure. Mandatory regulation itself contradicts the spirit of 'semi-formal' alternative (extrajudicial) methods for conflict resolution. As such, the presence of direct prohibitions or severe restrictions may not only become challenging in the performance of law but such peremptory norms can also make mediation unattractive and ineffective for some particular types of dispute, such as labor disputes. The principle of preserving a mediator's neutrality is possible if exercised within the framework of a balanced approach to reasonable limits and discretionary rules for the provision of certain types of legal assistance to disputing parties. The present article aims to consider the possibilities and limitations on a mediator's ability to provide particular types of legal assistance where the guarantee of non-discrimination between disputing parties' interests is presupposed.

The article tackles a problem of disputable issues coming alongside the implementation of public interests for the protection of violated private property rights in the European Union member states and the Russian Federation in regard of the possibility to collect additional (compensatory) or punitive amounts above the prescribed. The article provides an overview of various approaches to defi ne the notion "the right to judicial protection" and the "protection method" in European and Russian legal doctrines. The authors highlight controversial issues of imposing additional (compensatory) payments in Great Britain and Germany as a vivid example of various legal systems in action. The purpose of the article is to substantiate the global task - to develop a mechanism of additional compensation for violated rights in the legislation of the EU, EU member states and the Russian Federation with the focus on proprietary rights.

The aim of the research is to emphasize the importance of online E-commerce on a worldwide scale in the context of the benefi ts it provides to the national governments. Special attention is paid to the key E-market trends in Russia and European Community with a brief overview of the statistics and analysis data, which proves the necessity for its future development. However, the potential development of e-market in Russia has certain restrictions, connected with the current economic downtown, lack of legal provision and general consumer's distrust to online transactions. Authors dwell upon the possible ways of overcoming these urgent obstacles according to the European policy of bringing down barriers to unlock online opportunities, which is called the Digital Single Market (DSM). To do that, the paper explores the benefi ts of the DSM Strategy's introduction in Europe and the reasons whether it could be implemented into the Russia's frontiers or not. Finally, authors reckon that despite the fact that the several legislative improvements relating to electronic market has been introduced in recent years, there are several efficient suggestions to our government to scrutinize in order to achieve high rates of online sales, bring the economy up and enforce cross-border cooperation.

The purpose of the article is to consider the unifi ed digital contract rules of online sales in the European Union within the context of Digital Single Market Strategy in order to defi ne their legal perspectives, obstacles and activities to overcome them. Recently, the idea of legal regimes' globalization within the framework of existing economic, political and integration unions has gained great favor. The most significant and successful among them are: the European Union, Big Twenty (the G20), BRICS, the Euro-Asian Economic Community (EurAsEC). In the framework of these unions the initiative to create common legal and economic conditions for the movement of goods and services, via the Internet as well, in order to achieve economic and legal advantages has been enthusiastically taken at work. However, despite evident benefi ts and legal perspectives of these processes, there are a number of obstacles relating to Digital contract rules of online sales within the Single Digital Market Strategy context so that have become the subject of this article study. Having analyzed the legislations and the scientists' opinion on this issue, the authors have identified and considered some of the obstacles and offered a number of activities for their elimination.