Abstract: This article indicates that the existing international space law fails to regulate the dynamically developing space activity. The International policy-making in this sphere has established when the applied space activity virtually did not exist. Currently, the actively developing and very profitable space activity, for the most part involves the economic entities. The author notes that a range of means, such as contracts, recommendation documents, and national legislation are employed in the development of space law. The question raised whether the analogy can be applied for the development of international space law. This method of filling the gaps is widespread and largely used in private international law; however, its value for the public international law has not been determined. An essential issue is the ratio between the formalized sources of law and analogies; methodology for determining the existence of deficiencies of law; criteria for similarity and difference of the situations that imply the use of analogy. For solving the set tasks, the author uses the formal-logical, systemic, comparative, and other research methods. The author believes that it is possible to trace several factors that allow using analogies in the international law. The analogy should be substantiated for each individual case; it is necessary to draw comparison between regulated and unregulated cases; determine the identity of the elements that are relevant for application of analogy.

Abstract: The international judicial process, which emerged only about a century ago, could not be constructed by a model different from the judicial processes within the states. However, the legal framework for such process is created upon the generally accepted principles and norms of international law by the sovereign states and expresses their common will. With proliferation of the international courts in the end of the XX century emerged the pressing issue of uniformity of the judicial process, particularly the norms that regulate selection and assessment of evidence that affect court rulings. The article also explores the questions associated with witness testimony. Attention is given to the aspects of distribution of burden of proof, as well as methods, forms, and standards of proving that exist within the international judicial process. Research is conducted on the documents regulating the work of the branches of international justice and the established case law. A claim is made that international courts function within the certain framework that is defined in their constitutive acts. The analysis carried out in the article reveals insufficient development of corresponding regulation. The author concludes that a judicial body in these conditions has freedom of action that is currently clearly evident in the work of the International Court of Justice and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.

Abstract: One of the important elements of international court proceedings is the acquisition of information materials upon which the court makes its decisions. Such information, same as in the context of domestic courts, is called judicial evidence. The constituent documents of international courts contain very meager regulation of acquisition and evaluation of the evidence. The parties to international legal proceeding are the sovereign states, which makes it primarily adversarial. This implies that the parties represent the facts that confirm their positions. However, international courts rely on the principle of jura novit curia (“the court knows the law”), i.e. the parties to legal dispute do not need to plead or prove the law that applies to their case. This problem gains special importance due to the growing number and variety of international courts, as well as the emergence of a number of quasi-judicial institutions; in this sphere, all of them rely on the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice. Certain new trends are traced in the practice of courts and even categories of cases that pertain to human rights.

Abstract: This article discusses evidence in the judicial process as the information serving as grounds for court’s decision. In the international judicial process, which mostly of challenge character, significant role belongs to the sides, and the sides present the courts with information that substantiates each of their positions. The court, being an independent body, evaluates and selects information that it considers necessary to hear the case. It is advanced that the theory of international justice still lacks established and generally accepted procedure for selection of information. Such rules are formed in the judicial process and admissibility of these rules by the states or other subjects of international law. This work highlights the importance of determining comparable approaches towards the process of evidence in various international judicial bodies. Special attention is given to the issues of distribution of the burden of proof, methods, forms and standards of evidence applicable in the international judicial process.