Abstract: The subject of this research is the institution of procedural responsibility and its relations with legal relationships and legal practice. In her research Chuklova defines genetic, coordination, subordination and functional relations. According to the author, implementation of procedural responsibility provisions creates both material and procedural legal relations. The author demonstrates that the institution of procedural responsibility either relates to legal relationships at the functional genetic level disregarding the definition of a particular legal relationship or acts as a result of legal regulation or means of regulation. There should be legal grounds for creating such an institution, too. The institution of procedural responsibility creates conditions for discovering the truth in criminal, civil or administrative cases, thus demonstrating subordination relations. The research is based on general and special research methods such as comparative law, formal law analysis, functional and systems approaches, etc. As a result of the research, the author concludes that judicial practice is a coordination link between procedural form and material law, however, many court decisions demonstrate a negative tendency in implementation of the procedural responsibility provisions when there is a total substitution of one term with the other. For example, contempt of court includes such actions as numerous continuous disqualifications, non-submission of documents, failure to appear in court, non-compliance with court orders, negative remarks about a judge's professional or personal qualities. The article is funded by The Russian Foundation for Basic Research, project No. 19-011-00103 А 'Legal Responsibility in Russia's Legal System: the Concept of Interaction, Interconnection and Elimination of Contradictions with Other Elements of Legal System'. 

Abstract: The research subject is the institution of administrative procedure enforcement. The author defines its concept, studies its features and forms. In the author’s opinion, administrative and procedure enforcement has the following forms: measures of procedural protection (including protection, responsibility and security measures) and injunctions. The author compares the forms of administrative procedure enforcement, points out their common features and peculiarities. As the common features, the author mentions public enforcement character, normative formalization, existence within a legal relationship; peculiarities consist in the reasons for use, content, reasons for immunity and exceptions. The study is based on the dialectical method of cognition of social phenomena and the related general scientific and specific methods: comparative-legal, formal-legal, functional, system and others. The author formulates conclusions about the concept of administrative procedure enforcement and existence of injunctions, which have different reasons for use, different content, reasons for immunity and exceptions. The article is a part of the research project of Russian Foundation for Basic Research No 16-33-00017 “Complex intersectoral institution of legal responsibility: concept, structure, interrelations and place in the system of law”. 

Abstract: The subject of the study is the institute of procedural responsibility, which is a two-level system. The author examines in detail each element of this system, and notes that the first level is norms-definitions and norms-principles, the second level is represented by separate subinstitutions, such as civil procedural, criminal procedural, administrative procedural and constitutional procedural responsibility. Special attention is paid in the article to the study of measures of sectoral subinstitutions of procedural responsibility that ensure the protection and protection of procedural public relations. The research is based on the dialectical method of cognition of social phenomena and organically related general scientific and private methods: comparative legal, formal legal, functional, systemic and others. As a result of the conducted research, the author draws conclusions about the existence of an independent institution of procedural responsibility. The circumstances testifying to this are the existence of principles of procedural responsibility, norms-definitions, features of the application of measures of procedural responsibility. The author touches upon some prospects for improving the institute under study. The article was supported by the RGNF, project No. 16-33-00017 "Complex, intersectoral institute of legal responsibility: concept, structure, interrelations and place in the legal system".

Abstract: The subject of the research is the range of norms of corporate and labor legislation regulating the order of guaranteeing and compensating for the head of a legal entity. The article considers some collisions between the use of norms of corporate and labor legislation concerning the conditions of a dismissal wage inclusion in the work contract of the head of organization. The object of the research is a range of social relations with the participation of a head of a legal entity. The author concludes that it is reasonable to recognize the conditions of work contract as civil transactions. The research is based on the dialectical method of cognition and the related general scientific and special methods: comparative-legal, formal-logical, functional, systems and other methods. The author considers unacceptable the recognition of a voidable transaction as invalid and the use of the consequences of its invalidity for the protection of violated rights. In the considered cases a more adequate way of protection of a violated right would be the recognition of a decision of a legal entity council or (and) bodies about payment of dismissal wages, compensations or other pays to heads of organizations and members of collective executive bodies due to a work contract termination as invalid.