Abstract: The author of the article considers the civil law nature of personal data, focusing on their qualification in the context of the object of civil legal relations. The boundary of distinction between private and public law in the context of processing and protection of personal data is also drawn. The purpose of this study is to determine the place of personal data in civil law, including civil legislation, as well as to determine to what type of object of civil legal relations should be attributed such legal phenomenon as personal data. The novelty of this article lies in the author's proposed concept of a comprehensive legal regulation of processing and protection of personal data. In addition, the author brings for discussion the issue of the possibility of introducing a new object of civil legal relations, which expands the existing legal tools for the settlement of issues related to personal data. While writing the article such methods were used as: theoretical-predictive, formal-legal, system-structural and method of legal modeling. In the conclusion the author of the article states the necessity of fixing personal data in civil legal relations. The introduction of such an object as personal data into civil law is an important step in modern society, due to the accurate and effective regulation of their circulation and protection. The inclusion of this aspect creates a basis for judicial application and resolution of disputes related to the use of personal data in civil relations. In addition, it contributes to the protection of the rights of data subjects and ensures transparency and predictability of their legal regime. Thus, the need to qualify personal data in civil law not only corresponds to modern trends in the development of society, but also contributes to its sustainable functioning in the digital economy.

Abstract: In this article the authors have investigated the issue of the peculiarities of application of the sanction of article 20.25 of the CAO RF, presented statistical data indicating the dynamics of bringing to administrative responsibility under article 20.25 of the CAO RF for the last few years. In the course of writing this article the authors used universal dialectical, logical, statistical, formal-legal, hermeneutical methods of research. On the example of judicial practice the unfair and punitive nature of the sanction under consideration is shown. The authors present the positions of scientists regarding the goals of the legislator and law enforcer on the establishment and implementation of this administrative punishment, including: S.M. Zyryanov, P.P. Serkov, Z.I. Magomedova, A.V. Zhiltsov, F.K. Batenov and others. As a result of the study, the authors concluded that it is advisable to apply other (similar) legal means of influence on the offender who has not paid the fine on time, except for imposing a double fine. The present article is also a warning to legislators and law enforcers against potential injustice in the part of imposing a double fine. The authors' proposals contribute to the development of more balanced and fair mechanisms to influence the offender. The authors hope that their study will serve as a basis for reform in this area of law enforcement, contributing to the improvement of administrative legislation and judicial practice in favour of preventive over punitive policies.

Abstract: In this article the author highlights the legislative changes of 2016 related to the nature of fulfilment of the tax obligation. Taking into account many doctrinal positions, both advantages and legal problems concerning the mechanism of tax payment by another person are given. The purpose of this study is to assess the necessity and effectiveness of the legislator's assumption of non-personal fulfilment of tax obligation. The author concludes that it is necessary to take various measures that contribute to levelling the risks associated with non-personal fulfilment of tax liability. When writing the article such methods as theoretical-predictive, formal-legal, system-structural and method of legal modelling were used. The novelty of this article lies in the fact that it provides an extensive analysis of the study of non-personal fulfilment of tax liability, drawing attention to its advantages and disadvantages for both taxpayers and tax authorities. Also an aspect of the novelty of the article is the measures proposed by the author aimed at optimising the process of non-personal enforcement of tax liability. The main conclusion of the article is that to date there is no single legal means for the return of erroneously paid tax payments in the case when the payment is made by a third party. The author emphasises the urgent need for further work of the legislator in this direction in order to improve the legal mechanism of taxation in this part, as well as to ensure the protection of taxpayers' interests.