Veshkurtseva Z. —
Determination of the “circumstances worthy of attention” in application of the Articles 151 and 1101 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation: additional principles and criteria
// Law and Politics. – 2017. – ¹ 11.
– P. 35 - 44.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2017.11.24715
URL: https://en.e-notabene.ru/lpmag/article_24715.html
Read the article
Abstract:
The subject of this research is the topical issues of determination of the order and size of compensation for moral damage. The goal of this article consists in improving protection of the intangible benefits and personal non-property rights. The author formulates a set of measures that allow solving the issues identified in the course of the research. Particularly, in determining the order and measure of compensation for moral damage for violating the intangible benefits and personal non-property rights, the author suggests to rely upon the developed principles, additional criteria and rules. For reducing the number of violations in the information sphere, it is necessary to introduce a separate type of responsibility – the unified compensation for violating the intangible benefits and personal non-property rights (besides the compensation for moral damage). Compensation for moral damage should be divided into the two subtypes: main and qualified. The article also offers the methodology of identification and documentation of the individual peculiarities of a person and other circumstances worthy of attention in establishing the size of compensation for moral damage, as well as other suggestions of theoretical nature and practical measures. The scientific novelty of this study lies in the fact that the formulated suggestions allow revealing the content of the “circumstances worthy of attention”, solve the problem of objectification of determining the size of compensation for moral damage, as well as help minimizing the negative impact of subjectivity of the judicial discretion. The conclusions can be used for improving the conceptual apparatus and legal norm, practical application in court disputes associated with protection of the intangible benefits and personal non-property rights.
Veshkurtseva Z. —
Determination of the “circumstances worthy of attention” in application of the Articles 151 and 1101 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation: additional principles and criteria
// Law and Politics. – 2017. – ¹ 11.
– P. 35 - 44.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2017.11.43116
URL: https://en.e-notabene.ru/lamag/article_43116.html
Read the article
Abstract:
The subject of this research is the topical issues of determination of the order and size of compensation for moral damage. The goal of this article consists in improving protection of the intangible benefits and personal non-property rights. The author formulates a set of measures that allow solving the issues identified in the course of the research. Particularly, in determining the order and measure of compensation for moral damage for violating the intangible benefits and personal non-property rights, the author suggests to rely upon the developed principles, additional criteria and rules. For reducing the number of violations in the information sphere, it is necessary to introduce a separate type of responsibility – the unified compensation for violating the intangible benefits and personal non-property rights (besides the compensation for moral damage). Compensation for moral damage should be divided into the two subtypes: main and qualified. The article also offers the methodology of identification and documentation of the individual peculiarities of a person and other circumstances worthy of attention in establishing the size of compensation for moral damage, as well as other suggestions of theoretical nature and practical measures. The scientific novelty of this study lies in the fact that the formulated suggestions allow revealing the content of the “circumstances worthy of attention”, solve the problem of objectification of determining the size of compensation for moral damage, as well as help minimizing the negative impact of subjectivity of the judicial discretion. The conclusions can be used for improving the conceptual apparatus and legal norm, practical application in court disputes associated with protection of the intangible benefits and personal non-property rights.