Contents # 2/2020

I. Yu. Bogdanovskaya, S. Yu. Danilov
National Research University “Higher School of Economics”, Moscow 101000, Russian Federation
E-mail: ibogdanovskaya@hse.ru; sdanilov@hse.ru

Abstract
The article aims to analyze regulatory specifics of relations between the federation and its constituent entities in Canada in terms of achieving and maintaining a minimal consensus between them. The tasks are: to consider regulation of powers belonging to federal center and its constituent entities based on the evolving and unconsolidated multi-act Constitution; to investigate the role played by constitutional agreements and judicial precedents in the constitutional evolution of a modern federal state; to characterize the contribution of independent actions of the provinces to the development of the country.
The research is based on logical, systemic, formal legal and comparative historical methods.
The results are: extensive factual material, that hasn't previously used in domestic constitutional legal science, is put into academic circulation; the connection between the affirmation of Canada's sovereign rights in relations with the United Kingdom and recent trends towards a certain consolidation of the Federation's position in its relations with the constituent entities are revealed. The article estimates ways to modernize relations between federation and its constituent entities in the constitutional mechanism of Canada. The specificity of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is assessed through its impact on relations between the federation and the provinces. The status and activities of the newly created in the 2000s the Canadian Council of the Federation — instead of federal-provincial conferences — is analysed; the place it occupies in the constitutional mechanism of the country is evaluated. The article also contains an analysis of modern attempts to update the reform of the upper house of Parliament — the Senate of Canada, which cannot cope with the fulfillment of its main function — protecting provincial interests in order to optimize relations between the federation and peripheral provinces. Independent actions of the Canadian provinces in the field of international relations are considered based on legal practice. The impact of the provincial activities on the nationwide development of Canada and its prospects as a whole is assessed.

Keywords
competence, powers, provinces, convention, precedents, Senate, Alberta, British Columbia, Quebec.

For citation
Bogdanovskaya I. Yu., Danilov S. Yu. Searching for Consensus Between a Federation and Its Constituent Entities in Constitutionalism: Canadian Experience. Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel'stva i sravnitel'nogo pravovedeniya = Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law, 2020, no. 2, pp. 5—22. DOI: 10.12737/jflcl.2020.007 (In Russ.)

References

Bernier J., Laloie A. The Supreme Court of Canada as an Instrument of Political Change. Toronto, 1986.

Blakeney A. Canada, Its Foibles, Its Future. Kingston, 2000.

Cameron D. et al. Canada in the World: Comparative Perspectives on Canadian Constitution. New York, 2017. 244 p.

Cook C. et al. Constitutional Predicament. Montreal, 1994.

Danilov S. Yu. Legal Regulation of Special Status: Differing Law in the Quebec Case. Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki = Law. Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 2012, no. 2, pp. 99—108. (In Russ.)

Delledonne G. The Canadian Contribution to Comparative Law. London, 2019. 271 p.

Federalizm v Rossii i v Kanade: kurs lektsiy. Ed. by S. V. Kabyshev et al. Moscow, 2009.

Federalizm: teoriya, instituty, otnosheniya (sravnitel’no-pravovoe issledovanie). Ed. by B. N. Topornin. Moscow, 2001. 376 p.

Hogg P. The Constitutional Law of Canada. Toronto, 2007. 988 p.

Hunter R. Greenpeace to Amchitka. The Environmental Odyssey. Vancouver, 2004. 265 p.

Izenzee Y., Kirkhgof G. Gosudarstvennoe pravo Germanii. Vol. 2. Moscow, 1994.

Joyal S. Protecting Canadian Democracy. The Senate You Never Knew. Montreal, 2013. 258 p.

Knopf R., Morton F. The Charter Politics. Scarborough, 2000.

McKenna M. et al. The Canadian and American Constitutions in Comparative Perspective. Calgary, 1990. 289 p.

McWhinney E. Canada and the Constitution. Toronto, 1990.

Pammett J. et al. Canada 150. Exploring State of Democracy. Montreal, 2019. 409 p.

Peacock H. et al. Rethinking the Constitution. Toronto, 1999.

Reid S. The Breakup of Quebec. Democracy and Danger of Partition. Toronto, 2006. 310 p.

Scott F. The Essays on Constitution. Aspects of Canadian Law and Politics. Toronto, 1987.

Smiley D. The Federal Condition in Canada. Toronto, 2000.

Stevenson G. Building Nations from Diversity. Canadian and American Experience Compared. Montreal, 2014. 524 p.

Stewart F. Constitutional Determinants of Interprovincial Governance. Ottawa, 2018. 164 p.

Swinton K., Chandler M. The Advanced Constitutional Law. Federalism and Public Policy. Toronto, 2000. 195 p.

The Globe and Mail. 2018. December 4.

The Government of Canada. Notes on Canadian Federalism. Ottawa, 2017.

Trudeau P. Federalism and French Canadians. New York, 1977. 316 p.

Wheare K. The Modern Constitutions. Oxford, 1966.

Young R. The Secession of Quebec and Future of Canada. Montreal, 2014. 389 p.

  Download

R. D. Grebnev
Peoples' Friendship University of Russia, Moscow 117198, Russian Federation
E-mail: grebnev_rd@pfur.ru

Abstract
The article's relevance is determined by significant changes in the judiciary infrastructure and dynamic development of its legislation within last 5 years. Since 2014 we have seen an active progress in the judicial legislation and its infrastructure, which, in our opinion, indicates the state builders' search for an ideal judiciary model in modern Russia and determination of the presidential and legislative authorities in improving the judiciary in Russia.
The goal of the study is to conduct a legal study of judicial acts' role and place in the law-making process. To achieve this goal, it seems reasonable to solve the following tasks: to study judicial policy in the law and order mechanism in the Russian Federation, the role and place of commercial and general jurisdiction courts' acts, and acts of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in the law-making process.
The methodological basis of the study consisted of General scientific research methods (analysis, including system analysis, as well as synthesis, induction, deduction, etc.), as well as private scientific research methods (comparative legal, formal legal, legal and linguistic, etc.).
According to the results of the study, it seems reasonable to formulate the following brief conclusions. The nature of justice is determined by the fact that justice forms the judicial policy as a phenomenon of the judicial power in modern Russia, which in practice of law enforcement aims to participate in the formation of the rule of law in the Russian Federation in two aspects — first is to act as the final stage of enforcement, which is a clarification and concretization of law, and second is to summarize the public demand for improvement of the legislation expressed in the array of legal disputes and judicial acts.

Keywords
judicial power, separation of powers, analogy of law, analogy of statutory law, judicial system, case law, judicial policy, judicial decision, rule of law.

For citation
Grebnev R. D. The Role and Place of Judicial Acts in the Law-Making Process. Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel'stva i sravnitel'nogo pravovedeniya = Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law, 2020, no. 2, pp. 23—35. DOI: 10.12737/jflcl.2020.008 (In Russ.)

References

Bazhanov E. P., Bazhanova N. E. Mnogolikiy mir. Moscow, 2010.

Bryantsev V. D. Judicial Law: Modern Conceptions. Russian Law: Theory and Practice, 2008, no. 2.

Chepurnova N. M. Sudebnaya vlast’ v Rossiyskoy Federatsii: problemy teorii i gosudarstvenno-pravovoy praktiki. Dr. diss. Moscow, 1999.

Ivanov A. A. Speach on Precedent. Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki = Law. Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 2010, no. 2, pp. 3—11. (In Russ.)

Khlopushin S. N. Uvazhenie k sudebnomu resheniyu kak priznak pravovogo gosudarstva. Sudebnaya reforma i pravosudie v Rossii: evolyutsiya, problemy i tendentsii. Sbornik materialov vserossiyskoy konferentsii, posvyashchennoy 20-letiyu deystviya v Rossii Zakona “O statuse sudey v Rossiyskoy Federatsii” i 75-letiyu so dnya obrazovaniya Vologodskogo oblastnogo suda (Vologda, 17 oktyabrya 2012 goda). Vologda, 2012.

Lebedev V. M. Sudebnaya vlast’ v sovremennoy Rossii: problemy stanovleniya i razvitiya. St. Petersburg, 2001.

Pokrovskiy I. A. Osnovnye problemy grazhdanskogo prava. 3rd ed. Moscow, 2001.

Puchinskiy V. K. O edinoobraznom tolkovanii i primenenii Osnov grazhdanskogo sudoproizvodstva. Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i pravo, 1972, no. 4.

Skripilev A. E. Ob odnoy storone sudebnoy kontrreformy v Rossii. Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i pravo, 1983, no. 9.

Tolkovanie zakona i prava. Ed. by E. N. Tonkov. Vol. 1. St. Petersburg, 2015.

Yakovlev V. F. Ekonomika. Pravo. Sud. Problemy teorii i praktiki. Moscow, 2003.

Yakovlev V. F. Grazhdansko-pravovoy metod regulirovaniya obshchestvennykh otnosheniy. 2^nd ed. Moscow, 2006.

Yakovlev V. F. Rossiya: ekonomika, grazhdanskoe pravo (voprosy teorii i praktiki). Moscow, 2000.

Zor’kin V. D. Probely zakonodatel’nykh proektov v praktike Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossii. Vystuplenie Predsedatelya Konstitutsionnogo Suda RF. Available at: http://www.ksrf.ru/ru/News/Speech/Pages/ViewItem.aspx?ParamId=19 (accessed 07.12.2019).

  Download

M. S. Ablameyko, A. A. Andronchik
Belarusian State University, Minsk 220030, Republic of Belarus
E-mail: m.ablameyko@mail.ru; andronchikalex@gmail.com

Abstract
The transition to a new stage of social development — information society — defines special requirements for the state, citizens and business interaction through the introduction and use of electronic documents. E-document flow is now widespread in many countries. At the same time, the issues of development and unification of e-document flow in the Eurasian segment are considered insufficiently. In this regard, a research analysis of the current legislation and regulatory and methodological support in the countries of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) is needed in order to develop recommendations to eliminate the identification of terminological and other legal contradictions.
This paper analyzes the main problems of legal support of electronic document circulation in the EAEU countries. The article compares of the e-document definitions in the legal documents of the EAEU countries. It is noted that in the EAEU countries there is no unity in the structure and content of the basic national laws on e-document flow. There is the discrepancy in the legal norms for the e-document flow organization at the basic level, for example, in understanding such concepts as electronic document and electronic signature. It is shown, for example, that almost all EAEU member states recognize e-documents as evidence in court and as subject to correct registration equating it to paper documents (except cases when law refrains e-document use only).
This research concludes that it is necessary to substantiate e-document flow technologies convergence on national levels through their introduction and dissemination. To do this, an interstate program for the development of cross-border e-document flow should be adopted, for example, within the framework of the EAEU digital agenda. The implementation of specific activities related to the harmonization of legislation, the formation of standards and ensuring the compatibility of electronic documents created in different countries provide for necessary conditions to develop and disseminate cross-border e-document flow between organizations.

Keywords
e-document flow, legal support, EAEU countries, comparative analysis and unification, the common digital space of the Eurasian Economic Union.

For citation
Ablameyko M. S., Andronchik A. A. E-Document Flow in Countries of Eurasian Economic Union: Comparative Analysis and Ways to Unify. Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel'stva i sravnitel'nogo pravovedeniya = Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law, 2020, no. 2, pp. 36—47. DOI: 10.12737/jflcl.2020.009 (In Russ.)

References

Analysis of the level of development of electronic commerce in the field of foreign economic activity in the member states of the Eurasian Economic Union. Available at: http://www.eurasiancommission.org/ru/act/tam_sotr/edinoe_okno/Documents/Zaklyuchenie.pdf (accessed 10.03.2019). (In Russ.)

Bushueva E. Electronic document management in Russia: History and current state of affairs. Kadrovik. Kadrovoe deloproizvodstvo, 2012, no. 5, pp. 198—204. (In Russ.)

Fionova L. R., Shokorova N. N., Krokosheva N. V. Normative regulation is a necessary base for the effective management of electronic documents. Upravlenie ekonomicheskimi sistemami: elektronnyy nauchnyy zhurnal, 2018, no. 1. Available at: http://www.uecs.ru/uecs-107-1072018/item/4759-2018-01-28-10-45-49. (In Russ.)

Gaevskaya A. Overview of electronic document management systems. Available at: https://www.cfin.ru/software/kis/edms.shtml (accessed 28.06.2019). (In Russ.)

Skrynnikova M. V. The general legal aspects of use of electronic digital signature and its advantages in terms of development of electronic document circulation. Vestnik Voronezhskogo instituta MVD Rossii, 2013, no. 2, pp. 66—70. (In Russ.)

  Download

T. D. Oganesyan
Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation, Moscow 117218, Russian Federation
E-mail: t.oganesian@mail.ru

Abstract
The effectiveness of some traditional approaches, which guarantee data protection, is now significantly reduced and there is a search for new approaches able to meet the realities of today. In this regard, personal data protection issues become even more important in the context of the development and mass introduction of programs and methods of automated data processing. There is also a particular need to rethink the nature of the right to data protection and to develop new standards of international protection against relevant abuses in connection with the use of new information and communication technologies.
The present article pursues the following objectives: to conduct a periodization of formation and development of national and international legal framework for the protection of personal data, the analysis of different approaches to study nature of the right to data protection in the context of the right to respect private life, to identify the appropriateness of the allocation of the right to data protection as an independent and separate right to determine trends in the development of ECtHR and CJEU case law on data protection.
The methods used are systemic, comparative-legal, historical and legal methods, as well as logical and structural analysis.
The article analyses international legal framework of doctrinal research and legal positions of national and international courts in the field of data protection in the age of Big Data. Thus, it shows the importance of data protection in terms of Internet development and the new transnational ways to collect and process data. While international community hasn't faced these issues yet, these dictate the need for continued development and improvement of international and national standards of data protection. Here the ECtHR and the CJEU play a special role for progressive development of European case-law.
Today, the right to the protection of personal data is in an intermediate state: it can no longer be fully considered either as part of the right to respect privacy or as a full and independent right. As a matter of urgency, States should review their national laws, policies, and practices to ensure that they fully comply with the data protection standards developed by the Council of Europe and the EU. To improve the standards of the national legal system and establish sufficient safeguards in the field of data protection, it is recommended that the new provisions of the Convention 108 should be ratified and implemented. It is proposed to pay a particular attention to establishment of a data protection Commissioner (inspector) at the national level and a system of independent bodies that exercise independent and effective oversight of the activities of public authorities and large corporations in the field of personal data collection.

Keywords
protection of personal data, confidentiality, right to respect private life, Internet, Council of Europe, ECtHR, CJEU, Convention 108.

For citation
Oganesyan T. D. The Right to Personal Data Protection: Historical Aspect and Modern Conceptualization in the Age of Big Data. Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel'stva i sravnitel'nogo pravovedeniya = Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law, 2020, no. 2, pp. 48—63. DOI: 10.12737/jflcl.2020.010 (In Russ.)

References

De Hert P., Gutwirth S. Data Protection in the Case Law of Strasbourg and Luxembourg: Constitutionalism in Action. Reinventing Data Protection. Ed. by S. Gutwirth et al. New York, 2009.

Edwards L. Data Protection: Enter the General Data Protection Regulation. Law, Policy and the Internet. Oxford, 2018. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3182454.

Gellert R., Gutwirth S. The Legal Construction of Privacy and Data Protection. Computer Law & Security Review, 2013, vol. 29, pp. 522—530.

Golden K. Transborder Data Flows and the Possibility of Guidance in Personal Data Protection by the ITU. Houston Journal of International Law, 1984, vol. 6, pp. 205—232.

Gonzalez Fuster G. The Emergence of Personal Data Protection as a Fundamental Right of the EU. Cham, Switzerland, 2014. 274 p.

Gonzalez Fuster G., Hert P., Gutwirth S. Privacy and Data Protection in the EU Security Continuum. INEX Policy Brief, 2011, no. 12. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301228068_Privacy_and_Data_Protection_in_the_EU_Security_Continuum.

Groshan R. M. Transnational Data Flows: is the Idea of an International Legal Regime Relevant in Establishing Multilateral Control and Legal Norms. Law and Technology, 1981, vol. 14, pp. 1—30.

Hornung G., Schnabel C. Data Protection in Germany I: The Population Census Decision and the Right to Informational Self-Determination. Computer Law & Security Review, 2009, vol. 25, pp. 84—88.

Kokott J., Sobotta C. The Distinction Between Privacy and Data Protection in the Jurisprudence of the CJEU and the ECtHR. International Data Privacy Law, 2013, vol. 3, pp. 222—228.

Kovler A. I. Human rights in the digital age. Byulleten’ Evropeyskogo suda po pravam cheloveka, 2019, no. 6, pp. 146—150. (In Russ.)

Kuner C. An International Legal Framework for Data Protection: Issues and Prospects. Computer Law & Security Review, 2009, vol. 25.

Lynskey O. The “Europeanisation” of Data Protection Law. Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies, 2017, vol. 19, pp. 252—286.

Markovinovic Zunko I. EU Personal Data Protection Rules for Digital Age // Economic and Social Development. 22^nd International Scientific Conference on Economic and Social Development “The Legal Challenges of Modern World”. Book of Proceedings. Split, 2017, pp. 57—66.

Mostert M. et al. From Privacy to Data Protection in the EU: Implications for Big Data Health Research. European Journal of Health Law, 2018, vol. 25, iss. 1, pp. 43—55.

Nardell G. Q. Levelling up: Data privacy and the European Court of Human Rights // Data protection in a profiled world. Ed. by S. Gutwirth, Y. Poullet, P. De Hert. Dordrecht, 2010. Pp. 43—52.

Privatnost’ po-evropeyski. Novaya gazeta, 2018, May 23. Available at: https://www.novayagazeta.ru/articles/2018/05/22/76554-privatnost-po-evropeyski.

Raymont P. New Technology and Data Protection. Y. B.L. Computers & Tech, 1986, vol. 2, pp. 110—139.

Rusinova V. A European Perspective on Privacy and Mass Surveillance at the Crossroads. Higher School of Economics Research Paper No. WP BRP 87/LAW/2019. 2019, March 6. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3347711.

Scandamis N., Sigalas F., Stratakis S. Rival Freedoms in terms of Security: The Case of Data Protection and the Criterion of Connexity. Research Paper, 2007, no. 7. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/29997340_Rival_Freedoms_in_terms_of_Security_The_Case_of_Data_Protection_and_the_Criterion_of_Connexity_CEPS_Challenge_Paper_No_7_December_2007.

Simitis S. Reviewing Privacy in an Information Society. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 1987, vol. 135, no. 3, pp. 707—746.

Sloot van der B. Privacy as human flourishing: Could a shift towards virtue ethics strengthen privacy protection in the age of Big Data? Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and Electronic Commerce Law, 2014, vol. 5, pp. 230—244.

Talapina E. V. Personal data protection in the digital age: Russian law in the European context. Trudy Instituta gosudarstva i prava RAN, 2018, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 117—150. (In Russ.)

Tzanou M. Big Brother Watch and Others v. the United Kingdom: A Victory of Human Rights over Modern Digital Surveillance? Verfassungsblog. 2018. 18 September. Available at: https://verfassungsblog.de/big-brother-watch-and-others-v-the-united-kingdom-avictory-of-human-rights-over-modern-digital-surveillance.

Tzanou M. Data Protection as a Fundamental Right Next to Privacy? ‘Reconstructing’ a Not so New Right. International Data Privacy Law, 2013, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 88—99.

Wachter S., Mittelstadt B. A Right to Reasonable Inferences: Re-Thinking Data Protection Law in the Age of Big Data and AI. Columbia Business Law Review, 2019, vol. 2, pp. 18—28.

Wade A. E. A New Age of Privacy Protection: A Proposal for an International Personal Data Privacy Treaty. The George Washington International Law Review, 2010, vol. 42, pp. 658—663.

Yurkina E. E. Responsibility for blogging and commenting on the Internet: the practice of the European court of justice. Sud’ya, 2019, no. 2, pp. 54—62. (In Russ.)

Zanfir G. How CJEU’s “Privacy Spring” Construed the Human Rights Shield in the Digital Age. European judicial systems as a challenge for democracy. Cambridge; Antwerpen; Portland, 2015. 150 p.

  Download

A. P. Grakhotskiy
Francisk Skorina Gomel State University, Gomel 246019, Republic of Belarus
E-mail: grahotsky@gsu.by

Abstract
In April 1954, a process began in Darmstadt against three former servicemen of the 339th infantry division of the Wehrmacht, accused of participation in the mass execution of Jews in the Belarusian village of Krucha. This trial was significantly different from a number of other trials in the cases of the Nazi crimes committed during the Second World War. Thus, these were not the castigators from the ranks of the SS or the SD who faced the charges in Darmstadt, but the “valiant” servicemen of the German army. In the postwar decades, citizens of the FRG refused to admit that their fathers and grandfathers, who served in the ranks of the Wehrmacht, did not fulfill “their military duty”, but served the ideas of racism and world domination. The trial took place at the time, when the process of forming West German armed forces, and thus any facts that would cast a shadow on the military traditions of the German army were painfully perceived by the society and the state.
This article aims to show on the example of the trial in Darmstadt the specifics of the criminal prosecution of former Wehrmacht soldiers in the FRG, as well as to determine the legal assessment of the court received by the German military mass shooting of the innocent Jewish population. Following three trials, defendants K. Nöll and E. Zimber got minimum terms of deprivation, and W. Magel was finally declared not guilty. During the process, an attempt was made to swap the criminals and the victims of crime. The defendants were cast in the role of victims who suffered from difficult conditions of service in the rear, partisan attacks, the onslaught of Nazi propaganda and the Nazi regime. The Jewish population of the village of Kruchi fell under suspicion of the “criminal activity” — the support of partisans. The trial in Darmstadt was not able to “explode” the myth of the “unblemished” Wehrmacht that was established in the West German society. The sentence, applied to criminals, became an example not only of the unfairness of justice, but also of the violation of the historical truth and the memory of the Holocaust victims.

Keywords
crime, the village of Krucha, justice, Wehrmacht, Holocaust, jury trial, criminal prosecution, Nazi criminals, order, Karl Nöll, Emil Zimber, Wilhelm Magel.

For citation
Grakhotskiy A. P. Locale of Crime — The Village of Krucha: Justice of the FRG, “Unblemished” Wehrmacht and Holocaust. Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel'stva i sravnitel'nogo pravovedeniya = Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law, 2020, no. 2, pp. 64—79. DOI: 10.12737/jflcl.2020.011 (In Russ.)

References

Aistov L. S., Kraev D. Yu. International criminal law. St. Petersburg, 2013. 132 p. (In Russ.)

Alekseev N. S. Atrocities and retribution. Crimes against humanity. Moscow, 1986. 400 p. (In Russ.)

Antikhovich A. Mechanism of Application of Countermeasures: Regulation within the Framework of International Law Commission's Draft Articles on State Responsibility. Zhurnal mezhdunarodnogo prava i mezhdunarodnykh otnosheniy, 2005, no. 3, pp. 13—16. (In Russ.)

Beorn W. W. A Calculus of Complicity: The Wehrmacht, the Anti-Partisan War, and the Final Solution in White Russia, 1941—42. Central European History, 2011, no. 4, pp. 308—337.

Beorn W. W. Marching into Darkness. The Wehrmacht and the Holocaust in Belarus. Harvard, 2014. 336 p.

Beorn W. W., Frey D. Ordinary Soldiers: A Study in Ethics, Law and Leadership. Washington, 2014. 57 p.

Boroznyak A. I. Ferocious memory. Nazi Reich in perception of the Germans in the latter half of XX — early XXI century. Moscow, 2014. 352 p. (In Russ.)

Criminal objectives — criminal means. Materials on occupation politics of Fascist Germany in the USSR territory (1941—1944). Ed. by E. A. Boltin, G. A. Belov. Moscow, 1985. 328 p. (In Russ.)

Dirks C. Selekteure als Lebensretter. Die Verteidigungsstrategie des Rechtsanwalts Dr. Hans Laternser. “Gerichtstag halten über uns selbst...” Geschichte und Wirkung des ersten Frankfurter Auschwitz-Prozess. Ed. by I. Wojak. Frankfurt; New York, 2001. Pp. 163—192.

Eichmüller A. Keine Generalamnestie. Die Strafverfolgung von NS-Verbrechen in der frühen Bundesrepublik. München, 2012. 476 p.

Freudiger K. Die juristische Aufarbeitung von NS-Verbrechen. Tübingen, 2002. 444 p.

Gerlach Ch. Kalkulierte Morde. Die deutsche Wirtschafts und Vernichtungspolitik in Weißrussland 1941 bis 1944. Hamburg, 1999. 1231 p.

Grakhotskiy A. P. The Frankfurt trial (1963—1965) and overcoming the past in Germany. Lex Russica, 2019, no. 3, pp. 146—158. (In Russ.)

Greiner Ch. Zwischen Integration und Nation. Die militärische Eingliederung der Bundesrepublik Deutschland in die NATO, 1954 bis 1957. Westdeutschland 1945—1955: Unterwerfung, Kontrolle, Integration. Ed. by L. Herbst. München, 1986. Pp. 267—278.

Hoffmann V. Die Strafverfolgung der NS-Kriminalität am Landgericht Darmstadt. Berlin, 2013. 371 p.

Holzhaider H. Sie töteten trotzdem. Süddeutsche Zeitung. Available at: http://www.memoshoah.lu/pdf/ZW_SZ_Wehrmacht_Judenmord_de.pdf (accessed 22.07.2019).

Jasch H.-Ch., Kaiser W. Der Holocaust vor deutschen Gerichten: Amnestieren, Verdrängen, Bestrafen. Ditzingen, 2017. 263 p.

Kauganov E. L. The “Crimes of the Wehrmacht” exhibition (1995—1999) and its contribution to the German culture of memory about the Nazi past. Zhurnal issledovaniy sotsial'noy politiki, 2015, no. 3, pp. 421—436. (In Russ.)

Kovtun I. Wehrmacht security divisions: extermination of civilians and the fight against partisans. Zhurnal rossiyskikh i vostochnoevropeyskikh istoricheskikh issledovaniy, 2014, no. 1, pp. 91—108. (In Russ.)

Kühne T. Gemeinschaft und Genozid. Soldaten im nationalsozialistischen Vernichtungskrieg. Theologie.geschichte, 2010, no. 1, pp. 137—139.

Ledyakh I. A. Nazi criminals and court practice in the FRG. Moscow, 1973. 162 p. (In Russ.)

Miquel M. "Wir müssen mit den Mördern zusammenleben!“ NS-Prozesse und politische Öffentlichkeit in den sechziger Jahren. “Gerichtstag halten über uns selbst...” Geschichte und Wirkung des ersten Frankfurter Auschwitz-Prozess. Ed. by I. Wojak. Frankfurt; New York, 2001. Pp. 97—116.

Mironov V. S. Main provisions of the general part of the Germany military penal code. Problemy ekonomiki i yuridicheskoy praktiki, 2008, no. 4, pp. 23—26. (In Russ.)

NS-Prozesse und deutsche Öffentlichkeit: Besatzungszeit, frühe Bundesrepublik und DDR. Ed. by J. Osterloh. Göttingen, 2011. 456 p.

Nurnberg trials and contemporaneity. Ed. by V. V. Pustogradov. Moscow, 1986. 172 p. (In Russ.)

Pendas D. O. Der Auschwitz-Prozess. Völkermord vor Gericht. München, 2013. 565 p.

Perels J. Täter als Marionetten? Zur Einschränkung der Verantwortung für die Untaten des Dritten Reichs. In Perels J. Der Nationalsozialismus als Problem der Gegenwart. Frankfurt am Main, 2015, pp. 191—200.

Plato A. Vom Zeugen zum Zeitzeugen. Die Zeugen der Anklage im ersten Frankfurter Auschwitz-Prozess (1963—1965). Geschichte und Wirkung des ersten Frankfurter Auschwitz-Prozess. Ed. by I. Wojak. Frankfurt; New York, 2001. Pp. 193—215.

Reichensperger R. “Wie hätte ich mich verhalten sollen?” Der Standard. Available at: https://www.derstandard.at/story/915375/wiehaette-ich-mich-verhalten-sollen (accessed 20.06.2019).

Sauer S. Befehl ist nicht gleich Befehl. Kölner Stadt-Anzeiger. Available at: https://www.ksta.de/befehl-ist-nicht-gleich-befehl-14084610 (accessed 19.06.2019).

Smilovitskiy L. Catastrophe of the Jews in Belarus. Tel'-Aviv, 2000. 434 p. (In Russ.)

Streim A. Saubere Wehrmacht? Die Verfolgung von Kriegs- und NS-Verbrechen in der BRD und der DDR. Vernichtungskrieg: Verbrechen der Wehrmacht 1941—1944. Ed. by H. Heer. Hamburg, 1995. Pp. 569—597.

The Village of Krucha. My shtetl: project “Voices of the Jewish settlements. Mogilev region”. Available at: http://shtetle.com/shtetls_mog/krucha/krucha.html (accessed 12.05.2019). (In Russ.)

Verbrechen der Wehrmacht. Dimensionen des Vernichtungskrieges 1941—1944. Available at: http://www.verbrechen-der-wehrmacht.de/docs/ausstellung/handlung.htm (accessed 03.07.2019).

Volkmann H.-E. Zur Verantwortlichkeit der Wehrmacht. Die Wehrmacht: Mythos und Realität. Ed. by R.-D. Müller. München; Oldenbourg, 2012. Pp. 1195—1222.

Weinke A. Die Nürnberger Prozesse. München, 2006. 128 p.

Weinke A. Eine Gesellschaft ermittelt gegen sich selbst: die Geschichte der Zentralen Stelle Ludwigsburg 1958—2008. Darmstadt, 2008. 224 p.

  Download

A. N. Antonov
United Nations Mission in Kosovo, Pristina 10000, Kosovo, Republic of Serbia
E-mail: deuce75rus@mail.ru

Abstract
The article describes the problem of illegal multiple seizures of persons' real estate, mainly of Kosovo Serbs, who left Kosovo after the armed conflict in 1999. The number of such persons still amounts to hundreds of thousands of people. Almost all the property they left behind was seized by representatives of the “winner” — Kosovo Albanians.
After a brief retrospective on some significant aspects of the history of Kosovo and the development of property rights, the author goes back to the period from mid-1999, when the UN Mission in Kosovo began its activities. Recognizing the great importance of this problem, in November 1999, the mission created the first specialized agency — the Directorate for housing and property, whose functions were later successively transferred to two “heirs”. Despite the fact that most property conflicts have been resolved, the problem of repeated seizures of real estate has not yet been resolved, so the restoration of property rights remains largely on paper.
Among the reasons for this on-going situation are both legal and non-legal. With the withdrawal of the Serbian authorities, most of the cadastral records were also removed from Kosovo in 1999. After the agreement reached in 2012 between Belgrade and Pristina, the process of their return and unification with the Kosovo cadastre began. However, even their complete unification can only help to document the actual owners. The actual release of property and the ability to use and dispose of it normally depends on many other factors, including non-legal ones. There is widespread “silent” sabotage of the execution of decisions of authorized bodies for the restoration of property rights, and sometimes their open non-recognition by executive structures. In addition, there is insufficient use of the criminal sanctions available in the law against illegal “invaders”.
The continued lack of a real solution to property issues is hindering the return of displaced persons and refugees, and ultimately post-conflict reconciliation. The author concludes that without the political will of the Kosovo leadership, it will not be possible to solve the problem of protecting property rights.

Keywords
Kosovo, displaced persons, real estate, illegal seizure, property right, criminal prosecution, restoration of rights, return of property, eviction.

For citation
Antonov A. N. Illegal Seizure of Immovable Property in Kosovo: Overview of the Problem. Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel'stva i sravnitel'nogo pravovedeniya = Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law, 2020, no. 2, pp. 80—93. DOI: 10.12737/jflcl.2020.012 (In Russ.)

References

Arraiza J.-M., Moratti M. Getting the Property Question Right: Legal Policy Dilemmas in Post-Conflict Property Restitution in Kosovo (1999—2009). International Journal of Refugee Studies, 2009, vol. 21, iss. 3, pp. 421—452.

Baljosevic D. Suffering of Serbs in Orahovac after Sighing of “Kumanovo Agreement”. Available at: https://stanjestvari.com/2019/06/07/stradanje-srba-u-orahovcu/?fbclid=IwAR14PRA8b8tjg_5RugQyUlUSkpT1EZ3MFlV6Y8CZuq4aMp7M8UWhrBPMxyc (accessed 21.07.2019). (In Serbian)

Ballard Megan J. Post-Conflict Property Restitution: Flawed Legal and Theoretical Foundations. Berkeley Journal of International Law, 2010, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 462—496.

Batakovic B. Kosovo and Metohija in Serbo — Arbanas Relations. Pristina, 1991. 283 p. (In Serbian)

Beardsley E. Who Owns What? UN Tackles Kosovo Housing Tangle. Christian Science Monitor, 2002, January 10. Available at: https://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0110/p7s1-woeu.html (accessed 02.02.2020).

Gashi K. Real Estate Rows Cause Carnage in Kosovo. Balkan Insight, April 26, 2006. Available at: http://freerepublic.com/focus/fnews/1626569/posts (accessed 22.07.2019).

Housing and Property Restitution for Refugees and Displaced Persons: Implementing the 'Pinheiro Principles'. UNHCR, OCHA, UNFAO. 2007. 112 p. Available at: https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/pinheiro_principles.pdf (accessed 25.02.2019).

Kosovo Serb shot for reclaiming own home. January 2007. Available at: http://www.serbianna.com/news/2006/02922.shtml (accessed 22.07.2019).

Kosovo: Serb house stoned again. B92. 28 Februar y 2010. Available at: https://www.b92.net /eng/news/crimes.php?yyyy=2010&mm=02&dd=28&nav_id=65505 (accessed 22.07.2019).

Malcolm N. Kosovo: A Short History. New York, 2002. 492 p.

Moratti M. Addressing systemic obstacles to restitution in Kosovo: Legal aid as a fact finding tool. TerraNullus, 23 March 2012. Available at: https://terra0nullius.wordpress.com/2012/03/23/addressing-systemic-obstacles-to-restitution-in-kosovo-legal-aid-as-a-fact-findingtool/ (accessed 25.02.2019).

Morina D. Kosovo Ignores Call to Enforce Monastery's Land Claim. Balkan Transitional Justice, 21 April 2017. Available at: http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/kosovo-govt-stays-silent-over-eu-calls-on-monastery-land-04-21-2017 (accessed 25.02.2019).

Phillips D. L. Implementation Review of the Kosovo-Serbia dialogue. Institute for the Study of Human Rights, Columbia University, 5 September 2017. 37 p. Available at: https://www.humanrightscolumbia.org/sites/default/files/2017_09_05_kosovo-serbia_report.pdf (accessed 25.02.2019).

Priština official declares he'll “demolish church”, 22 April 2014. Available at: https://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics.php?yyyy=2014&mm=04&dd=22&nav_id=90069 (accessed 02.02.2020).

Rawls J. Justice as Fairness. Cambridge, 2001. 240 p.

Stanfield D., Thomas S., Kelm K., Dorsey J. F. An Assessment of Property Rights in Kosovo: Final Report. USAID, 2004. 160 p. Available at: https://www.land-links.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/USAID_Property_Rights_Assessment_Kosovo.pdf (accessed 02.02.2020).

Tawil E. Property Rights in Kosovo: A Haunting Legacy of a Society in Transition. International Center for Transitional Justice, 2009, 64 p. Available at: https://www.ictj.org/publication/property-rights-kosovo-haunting-legacy-society-transition (accessed 25.02.2019).

The Future of the Serbian Church in Pristina is Unclear Available at: https://balkaninsight.com/2015/02/05/neizvesna-sudbinata-nasrpska-crkva-vo-pristina/?lang=mk (accessed 24.02.2019). (In Macedonian)

Van Heugten G. Post-conflict property restitution in Kosovo: A continuing challenge. TerraNullus, 23 November 2012. Available at: https://terra0nullius.wordpress.com/2012/11/23/post-conflict-property-restitution-in-kosovo-a-continuing-challenge/ (accessed 25.02.2019).

Vicovac R. D. Challenges in Providing Legal Aid to Displaced Persons Following Armed Conflict: Lessons Learned from Kosovo. Journal of Human Rights Practice, vol. 5, iss. 1, 1 March 2013, pp. 195—206.

  Download

S. V. Chirkin, Ya. I. Lebedeva, M. S. Kuznetsova
Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation, Moscow 117218, Russian Federation

  Download

S. I. Gezerdava
National Research University “Higher School of Economics”, Moscow 109028, Russian Federation
E-mail: sager25@gmail.com

Abstract
This study is based on the results of the author's participation in the VIII International Congress of Comparative Law “Comparative law in search of a constitutional ideal” and is an attempt to compare the ideal and actually existing models of civil society in a comparative legal perspective. The specificity of the study of civil society in legal studies is that it appears in them mainly as an idealized normative construct, which is very different from its constituent elements (almost by analogy with the definition of such an abstract category as “system”). This understanding of civil society does not help clarify the boundaries between it and the state. However, this issue should have the key status in the relevant legal studies. Discussions on civil society should be based on a realistic understanding of it and take into account a number of constitutive characteristics (autonomy, pluralism, activism, selfregulation, self-organization, voluntariness, non-violence, etc.). The erosion of these characteristics is evidence of the crisis situation of civil society institutions. In this paper, we develop a hypothesis that suggests the connection of the essential characteristics of civil society with a number of basic political rights, freedoms and principles. The main focus of the work is on the approaches and methodology of legal studies of civil society. The work is critically analyzed the interpretation of civil society, where it is considered as a set of ideas about the proper state of society. In response to this understanding, arguments are presented to prove that the current concept limits the ability of the scientific doctrine to be critical of the state's arbitrary determination of the parameters of its relations with civil society. The approach that is most appropriate for both the complexity of the phenomenon and the subject area of legal research are chosen to consider civil society in an institutional context. The paper proves the need to use an empirical approach in civil society research, which will allow combining “existing” and “due” in order to form a theory and legal policy that is complementary to the interests of organized civil society.

Keywords
organized civil society, civil society organizations, proper and existing, essential characteristics of civil society, empirical and legal research.

For citation
Gezerdava S. I. Searching the Ideal of Civil Society: A Comparative Legal Study. Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel'stva i sravnitel'nogo pravovedeniya = Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law, 2020, no. 2, pp. 106—120. DOI: 10.12737/jflcl.2020.013 (In Russ.)

References

Baglay M. V. The Constitutional Law of the Russian Federation. Moscow, 2007. 1088 p. (In Russ.)

Belyaeva N. Yu., Karastelev V. E. Forms of civil participation of civil associations in public policy. XII International Scientific Conference on the Problems of Development of the Economy and Society. Ed. by E. G. Yasin. Moscow, 2012. Pp. 302—310. (In Russ.)

Blankenagel' A. Comments on the draft law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On public oversight in the Republic of Kazakhstan” (6 April 2015). Available at: https://www.zakon.kz/4701569-zakljuchenie-po-zakonoproektu.html#_ftn1 (accessed: 01.06.2019). (In Russ.)

Bondar' N. S. Authority and Freedom on Scales of Constitutional Justice. Moscow, 2005. 592 p. (In Russ.).

Chebankova E. State-sponsored civic associations in Russia: systemic integration or the “war of position”? East European Politics, 28:4, 2012, pp. 390—408. DOI: 10.1080/21599165.2012.674939

Cherdantsev A. F. Logico-linguistic Phenomena in Jurisprudence. Moscow, 2012. 320 p. (In Russ.)

Chestnov I. L. The Methodology and Methods of Legal Research. St. Petersburg, 2004. 124 p. (In Russ.)

Chestnov I. L. The Post-classical Theory of Law. St. Petersburg, 2012. 650 p. (In Russ.)

Chirkin V. E. Civil society, Constitutional Collective Rights and Obligations. Grazhdanin i pravo, 2012, no. 5, pp. 3—16. (In Russ.)

Chirkin V. E. The Common Human Values and the Modern State. Gosudarstvo i pravo, 2002, no. 2, pp. 5—13. (In Russ.)

Civil Society and State. Moscow, 2005. 88 p. (In Russ.)

Civil Society as a Guarantee of Political Dialogue and Counteraction to Extremism: Key Constitutional and Legal Problems. Ed. by S. A. Avak'yan. Moscow, 2015. 652 p. (In Russ.)

Civil Society. Moscow, 2016.

Edwards M. Civil society. London, 2004. 402 p.

Fischman J. B. Reuniting “Is” and “Ought” in Empirical Legal Scholarship. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, vol. 162, 2013, pp. 117—168.

Fleming J. E., McClain L. C. Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues. Cambridge, MA and London, 2013. 384 p.

Garton J. The Regulation of Organised Civil Society. Oxford, 2009.

Gellner E. Usloviya svobody. Grazhdanskoe obshchestvo i ego istoricheskie soperniki. Moscow, 2004.

Hopkins B. R. Bruce R. Hopkins' Nonprofit Law Dictionary. New Jersey, 2015. 480 p.

Hovard M. M. The Weakness of Civil Society in Post-communist Europe. Moscow, 2009. 190 p. (In Russ.)

Ivin A. A. Argumentation in the Processes of Communication. Pro et contra. Moscow, 2017. 382 p. (In Russ.)

Jensen M. N. Concepts and Conceptions of Civil Society. Journal of Civil Society, 2:1, 2006, pp. 39—56. DOI: 10.1080/17448680600730934

Keane J. Civil Society, Definitions and Approaches. International Encyclopedia of Civil Society. Ed. by H. K. Anheier, S. Toepler, R. List. Springer, 2010, pp. 461—464. DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-93996-4_531

Keane J. Civil society: Old Images, New Visions. Cambridge; Oxford, 1998.

Kerimov A. D. The Modern State: Questions from Theory. Moscow, 2014. 144 p. (In Russ.)

Koen Dzh. L., Arato E. Grazhdanskoe obshchestvo i politicheskaya teoriya. Moscow, 2003.

Kozhevnikov O. A. The Law of non-profit organisations. Moscow, 2016. 280 p. (In Russ.)

Kubes V. Grundfragen der Philosophie des Rechts. Wien; New York, 1977.

Laine J. Debating Civil Society: Contested Conceptualizations and Development Trajectories. International Journal of Not-for-Profit Law, vol. 16, no. 1, 2014, pp. 59—77.

Lloyd D. The Idea of Law. Moscow, 2009. 376 p. (In Russ.)

Macedo S. The Constitution, Civic Virtue, and Civil Society: Social Capital as Substantive Morality. Fordham Law Review, 2001, vol. 69, iss. 5, 2001, pp. 1573—1593.

Malyy D. A. Constitutional right to unite in the Russian Federation. Cand. diss. Saransk, 2001. 191 p.

Marchenko M. N. State of Law and Civil Society (the Theoretical Legal Research). Moscow, 2015. 646 p. (In Russ.)

Matuzov N. I. Grazhdanskoe obshchestvo: sushchnost' i osnovnye printsipy. Pravovedenie, 1995, no. 3.

Miller C., Howard J., Mateeva A. et al. Toward a Typology of Civil Society: Understanding Non-Government Public Action. Civil Society in Comparative Perspective. Ed. by B. Enjolras, K. H. Sivesind. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2009. Pp. 71—105.

Nikitina E. E. The Institutionalization of Civil Society in Russia: the Historical and Theoretical Aspect. Zhurnal rossijskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2017, no. 2, pp. 30—40. DOI: 10.12737/24098 (In Russ.)

Nikitina E. E. The System of Civil Society Institutions in Russia: the Constitutional Aspect. Zhurnal rossijskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2017, no. 6, pp. 37—48. DOI: 10.12737/article_59240612b1a000.16568704 (In Russ.)

Non-profit Organizations in International and National Law. Ed. by T. Y. Khabrieva, S. V. Chirkin. Moscow, 2017. 304 p. (In Russ.)

Nudnenko L. A. Theory of Democracy. Moscow, 2001. 95 p. (In Russ.)

Nussberger A. Pluralism as the Constitutional Value. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, 2008, no. 6 (67), pp. 89—98. (In Russ.)

Partington M. Empirical Legal Research and Policy-making. The Oxford Handbook of Empirical Legal Research. Ed. by P. Cane, H. M. Kritzer. Oxford University Press, 2010. Pp. 1002—1025.

Permyakov Yu. E. The Empirical Foundations of Jurisprudence. Vestnik Samarskoy gumanitarnoy akademii. Seriya: Pravo, 2007, no. 1, pp. 43—54. (In Russ.)

Pisarev A. N. The Forms of Interaction Between the State and Civil Society in the Russian Federation. Moscow, 2017. 218 p. (In Russ.)

Rosenblum N. L., Post R. C. Introduction. Civil Society and Government. Ed. by N. L. Rosenblum, R. C. Post. Princeton; Oxford, 2002. Pp. 1—26.

Rukovodyashchie printsipy po svobode ob"edineniy. 2^nd ed. Varshava, 2011.

Sidel M. Civil Society and Civil Liberties. The Oxford Handbook of Civil Society. Ed. by M. Edwards. Oxford University Press, 2011. Pp. 298—311.

Soyfer T. V. Non-profit legal entity as a form of realization of the constitutional right to assotiation. Zakonodatel'stvo i ekonomika, 2012, no. 2, pp. 18—29. (In Russ.)

Strus' K. A. Gosudarstvo i grazhdanskoe obshchestvo: problemy pravovogo vzaimodeystviya v Rossii. St. Petersburg, 2005.

Subochev V. V. Civil Society: the Ideal Model or “Objective Reality”? Problemy vzaimodeystviya grazhdanskogo obshchestva, gosudarstva i biznesa: opyt Rossii i Germanii. Materialy mezhdunarodnogo kruglogo stola. 27 March 2012. Rostov-on-Don, 2012. Pp. 145—156. (In Russ.)

Tarasenko A. Non-profit Sector in the Countries of the European Union and Russia in the Context of Welfare State Transformation. St. Petersburg, 2015. 224 p. (In Russ.)

Tikhomirov Yu. A. Civil Society in the Focus of Law. Zhurnal rossijskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2013, no. 10, pp. 35—45. (In Russ.)

Towfigh E. V. Empirical arguments in public law doctrine: Should empirical legal studies make a “doctrinal turn”? International Journal of Constitutional Law, 2014, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 670—691. DOI: 10.1093/icon/mou039.

Tumanova A. S. The Concepts of Civil Society of Western Social Thinkers of the 20th Century. Grazhdanskoe obshchestvo v Rossii i za rubezhom, 2013, no. 1, pp. 10—15. (In Russ.).

Tumanova A. S., Safonov A. A. The Socio-economic, Political-legal and Financial Options of Civil Society. Finansy: teoriya i praktika, 2017, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 106—117. (In Russ.)

Tushnet M. V. The Constitution of Civil Society. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 2000, vol. 75, pp. 379—415.

Van der Ploeg T. J., van Veen W. J. M., Versteegh C. R. M. Civil Society in Europe: Minimum Norms and Optimum Conditions of its Regulation. Cambridge (UK), 2017. 589 p.

Yum D. Works. Moscow, 1966. Vol. 1. (In Russ.)

  Download

L. V. Sagdeeva
Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation, Moscow 117218, Russian Federation
E-mail: lsagdeeva@itps-russia.ru

Abstract
The article discusses the principle of territoriality of exclusive rights, as well as the existing exceptions to it in copyright, patent and trademark law in the United States. The article considers the positions of the scientific doctrine of common law countries, as well as the judicial practice of the courts of appeal and the Supreme Court of the United States.
The research methodology is determined by the specifics of the chosen subject and includes a set of general scientific methods of scientific knowledge (analysis, synthesis, comparison).
The main conclusions of the study are: the territorial nature of the exclusive right is considered a generally recognized principle and is historically associated with the granting of privileges as the initial method of legal protection. In the scientific literature, this is seen as a significant difference between the property right, considered as a “limitless” right, and an exclusive right. The principle of territoriality in intellectual property law is aimed at sovereign states that are isolated from each other, but the facts are that the possibilities for such regulation are decreasing. The non-compliance of a set of individual national legal regimes with the requirements of the global economy is particularly evident for those intellectual property rights that do not require registration. The most striking exception to the principle of territoriality is the concept of well-known trademarks, which is necessary for international companies when entering foreign markets. As international Commerce becomes more and more international, what at first glance appears to be “extraterritoriality”, that is, what is called “extraterritoriality”. an attempt to apply the legislation of one's country outside of it may be an opposition to violation of rights in several jurisdictions (multi-territoriality). In this case, depending on the circumstances of the case, the application of foreign law may be required. Thus, the difference between property rights and exclusive rights, consisting in the "territorial" nature of the latter, is not so significant and insurmountable. The exclusive right, like the right of property, expands its borders, departing in a certain respect from the national regime.

Keywords
exclusive right, property right, intellectual property, principle of territoriality, extraterritoriality, multiterritoriality, wellknown trademark.

For citation
Sagdeeva L. V. Issues of Extraterritoriality of Exclusive Rights on the Example of US Law. Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel'stva i sravnitel'nogo pravovedeniya = Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law, 2020, no. 2, pp. 121—137. DOI: 10.12737/jflcl.2020.014 (In Russ.)

References

Bernam U. Introduction to the Law and Legal System of the United States. Moscow, 2006. 1216 p. (In Russ.)

Bradley C. A. Territorial Intellectual Property Rights in an Age of Globalism. Virginia Journal of International Law, 1997, vol. 37, pp. 505—585. Available at: https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/faculty_scholarship/1187 (accessed 10.05.2019).

Dinwoodie G. B. Territorial Overlaps in Trademark Law: The Evolving European Model. Notre Dame Law Review, 2017, vol. 92, no. 4, pp. 1669—1743. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2931757 (accessed 10.05.2019).

Dinwoodie G. B. Trademarks and Territory: Detaching Trademark Law from the Nation-State. Houston Law Review, 2004, vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 885—973. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=616661 (accessed 10.05.2019).

Dornis T. W. Trademark and Unfair Competition Conflicts: Historical-Comparative, Doctrinal, and Economic Perspectives. Cambridge, 2017. 696 p. Available at: https://books.google.ru/books?id=ufURDgAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false (accessed 10.05.2019).

Drahos P. Intellectual Property and Human Rights. Intellectual Property Quarterly, 1999, no. 3, pp. 349—371. Available at: https://www.anu.edu.au/fellows/pdrahos/articles (accessed 10.05.2019).

Faris J. The Famous Marks Exception to the Territoriality Principle in American Trademark Law. Case Western Reserve Law Review, 2009, vol. 59, iss. 2, pp. 451—489. Available at: http://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/caselrev/vol59/iss2/8 (accessed 10.05.2019).

Ginsburg J. C. Extraterritoriality and Multiterritorality in Copyright Infringement. Virginia Journal of International Law, 1997, vol. 37, pp. 587—602. Available at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/621 (accessed 10.05.2019).

Ginsburg J. C. International Copyright: From a “Bundle” of National Copyright Laws to a Supranational Code? The Journal of the Copyright Society of the United States, 2000, vol. 47, pp. 265—291. Available at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/1212 (accessed 10.05.2019).

Harvard Law Review, 2017, vol. 130, no. 7. Available at: https://harvardlawreview.org/2017/05/trader-joes-co-v-hallatt (accessed 10.05.2019).

Holbrook T. R. Boundaries, Extraterritoriality, and Patent Infringement Damages. Notre Dame Law Review, 2017, vol. 92, iss. 4, art. 10, pp. 1745—1794. Available at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr/vol92/iss4 (accessed 10.05.2019).

Hugenholtz P. B. Copyright Territoriality in the European Union. Amsterdam, 2010. 24 p. Available at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/studies (accessed 11.06.2019).

Krupko S. Legal collisions in intellectual property law. Khozyaystvo i pravo. Prilozhenie, 2014, no. 11. 64 p. (In Russ.)

Lundstedt L. Territoriality in Intellectual Property Law. Stockholm, 2016. 585 p. Available at: http://su.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A972658&dswid=5257 (accessed 06.06.2019).

Lunts L. A. Private international law course. Moscow, 2002. 1007 p. (In Russ.)

Peukert A. Territoriality and Extraterritoriality in Intellectual Property Law. Beyond Territoriality: Transnational Legal Authority in an Age of Globalization. Ed. by G. Handl, J. Zekoll. Leiden; Boston, 2012. Pp. 189—228. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1592263.

Rosén J. Individualism and Collectiveness in Intellectual Property Law. Cheltenham, UK, 2012. 392 p.

Zyatitskiy S., Terletskiy V., Leont'ev K. Development of the territorial principle of copyright and the problem of transnationality in the new technologies era Development of the territorial principle of copyright and the problem of transnationality in the new technologies era. Intellektual'naya sobstvennost'. Avtorskoe pravo i smezhnye prava, 2002, no. 3, pp. 2—17. (In Russ.)

  Download

N. N. Peturova
Central Election Commission of the Russian Federation, Moscow 109012, Russian Federation
E-mail: embassysquare@yahoo.com

Abstract
The Russian legal regulation of mental incapable adults' rights protection does not correspond to the full extent to the international obligations of the Russian Federation undertaken due to the international conventions ratification, furthermore it may be characterized by fragmentariness, shortage of flexibility and coherence. This circumstance has extensively been the subject to criticism by the doctrine and the courts. From this perspective it is pertinent to contemplate the specific features of the custody and guardianship legal regulation in France and Switzerland, since due to the recent law reforms in these countries the new legal regulation of incapable and partially incapable adults' rights protection based on the concept revision of the approaches to the mental incapable adults' rights and interests protection have been elaborated.
The choice of comparative legal analysis was conditioned by the purpose and the tasks of the present article.
The purpose of the present article is to reveal the problems of custody and guardianship over adults legal regulation in Russia and to find the ways to solve these problems taken into account the new positive experience of France and Switzerland due to elaboration of proposals that could inspire the creation of the full and pertinent legal regulation of the relevant legal relationships. Based on the given purpose the following tasks have been set: to compare the essential participants of the custody and guardianship relationships in Russia, France and Switzerland; to analyze the substance of the relevant relationships; to determine the possibility of introducing in the Russian legal system new mechanisms elaborated in the result of French and Swiss legal systems analysis.

Keywords
guardianship, custodianship, limited legal capacity, mental disability.

For citation
Peturova N. N. Features of the Legal Regulation of Custody and Guardianship Over Adults in Russia, France and Swizerland. Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel'stva i sravnitel'nogo pravovedeniya = Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law, 2020, no. 2, pp. 138—153. DOI: 10.12737/jflcl.2020.015 (In Russ.)

References

Antokol'skaya M. V. The Family Law. 3rd ed. Moscow, 2010. 432 p. (In Russ.)

Bockstaller J. The Multiple Guardianship (Art. 379 II ZGB). Fribourg, 1978. 132 p. (In German)

Droit de la famille. 7e ed., sous la direction de P. Murat. Paris, 2016. 1553 p.

Kuhnlein C. The Fundamental Rights and the Principle of Subsidiarity in the Protection of the Adult and the Child. Zeitschrift für Kindesund Erwachsenenschutz. Revue de la protection des mineurs et des adultes, 2019. Heft. 2, pp. 99—127. (In French)

Lemouland J.-J. To Simplify and Center the Role of Juge in the Domain of the adults' Protection. Recueil Dalloz, 2019, pp. 827—838. (In French)

Lemouland J.-J., Noguero D. The Adults under Protection. Recueil Dalloz. Juin 2018 — Mai 2019, pp. 1412—1428. (In French)

Meier P. The Issue of the Natural Persons Law and the Protection of the Adult. Schweizerische Juristen-Zeitung, Revue Suisse de Jurisprudence. 2019. Heft 10, pp. 315—320. (In French)

Pecqueur E. The destiny of the persons under protection in the reform. Actualité Juridique, 2019, no. 5, pp. 266—277. (In French)

Peturova N. N. Reform of Legislative Regulation of Protection of the Adult Persons' Rights in Switzerland. Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel'stva i sravnitel'nogo pravovedeniya = Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law, 2017, no. 3, pp. 63—70. (In Russ.)

Peturova N. N. The Reflection of the Adults' Protection International Standards in the French Civil Law. Semeynoe i zhilishchnoe pravo, 2017, no. 2, pp. 12—15. (In Russ.)

Pobedonostsev K. P. The Civil Law Course. Vol. I—III (Reproduced According to the Edition of Saint Petersburg, 1896). Moscow, 2004. 2206 p. (In Russ.)

The civil code of France: Learning and Practical Commentary. Moscow, 2008. 752 p. (In Russ.)

The Family Law. 7th ed. Ed. by P. Murat. Paris, 2016. 1553 p. (In French)

Trofimets I. A. The Incapacity of the Citizen and the Right to Marriage. Semeynoe i zhilishchnoe pravo, 2012, no. 6, pp. 29—33. (In Russ.)

  Download