Reference:
Pilipenko A.N..
Principle of Legal Security in French Law
// Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law. – 2013. – ¹ 4.
– P. 646-652.
Read the article
Abstract: The present article continues a series of articles, devoted to the problems, connected with activities of lawmaking
process in France. The matter is about the latest constitutional reforms in the country, the role of Parliament in
the legislative process, the idea of “general interest” in public law, the quality of the law. In general the author’s task can
be formulated as follows: how deeply does the modern French law reflect and express the realities and needs of the state,
society and individuals. The subject of analysis of this article is the principle of legal security, which focuses the requirements
to legislation and rule-making subjects, and also, the interpretation results of such activity in public consciousness.
Keywords: principle, legal security, confidence legitimate, law, doctrine, the quality, the Constitution, the law, the Parliament, the Government, the Constitutional Council, the State Council.
References:
Loi n° 2009-526 du 12 mai 2009 de simplification et de clarification du droit et d’allègement des procedures // Journal Officiel du 13 mai 2009 page 7920.
Conseil constutionnel. Décision n° 2005-530 DC du 29 décembre 2005.
Circulaire du 21 novembre 1995 relative à l’expérimentation d’une étude d’impact accompagnant les projets de loi et de décret en Conseil d’État // Journal Officiel du 1 décembre 1995 page 17566.
Circulaire du 26 janvier 1998 relative à l’étude d’impact des projets de loi et de décret en Conseil d’Etat // Journal Officiel du 6 février 1998 page 1912.
Rapport d’information au nom du comité d’évaluation et de contrôle des politiques publiques sur les sur les critères de contrôle des études d’impact accompagnant les projets de loi. 2009. Bibliothèque des rapports publics-La Documentation française.fr.
Sophie BOISSARD. Comment garantir la stabilité des situations
Reference:
Khalabudenko O.A..
Some Issues of Comparative Law Methodology —
from Functionalism to Construction
and Deconstruction
// Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law. – 2013. – ¹ 4.
– P. 653-663.
Read the article
Abstract: The paper presents the author’s vision of the ways to resolve the complex of philosophical and methodological problems
in comparative law. The author points out the possibility of applying the legal constructivism method for determining
the subject sphere of comparison. The author proves that the externalized result of applying the functional structural method
is possible only at the level of the comparable legal reality. The relevant concept (“construction”), according to the author’s
opinion, should be able to be expressed in the objective form; it should be characterized by certainty and autonomy among
other legal phenomena. The paper covers the author’s point of view on the use of the construction on three levels of dimension:
theoretical, normative and substantial. The implicit properties of the construction specific to each level of dimension can
resolve the problems, arising at the implementation of the Comparative Law issues. The application of the method of deconstruction
allows solving a number of methodological issues, related to the application of metaphysical conceptual categories
of the legal science, which stresses the effectiveness of the method of constructivism for Comparative Law.
Keywords: Comparative Law, methodology of Comparative Law, legal culture, legal tradition, legal construction, constructivism, deconstruction, functionalism, structure.
References:
Avtonomova N.S. Filosofskii yazyk Zhaka Derrida. M.: Rossiiskaya politicheskaya entsiklopediya (ROSSPEN), 2011.
Alekseev S.S. Izbrannoe. M.: «Statut», 2003.
Alekseev S.S. Pravo na poroge novogo tysyacheletiya: nekotorye tendentsii mirovogo pravovogo razvitiya — na-dezhda i drama sovremennoi epokhi. M.: Statut, 2000.
Afonasin E.V., Didikin A.B. Filosofiya prava: ucheb. posobie. Novosibirsk, 2006.
Gasparyan D.E. Vvedenie v neklassicheskuyu filosofiyu/ D.E. Gasparyan. M.: Rossiiskaya politicheskaya entsiklo-pediya (ROSSPEN), 2011.
Dekomb V. Sovremennaya frantsuzskaya filosofiya: [Sbornik] / Per. s frants. M.: Izd-vo «Ves' mir», 2000.
Dennis Lloid. Ideya prava / perevod s angliiskogo M.A. Yumasheva, Yu.M. Yumasheva; nauch. red. Yu.M. Yumashev. 5-e. izd. M.: «KNIGODEL», 2009.
Dozhdev D.V. Sravnitel'noe pravo: sostoyanie i perspektivy // Rossiiskii ezhegodnik sravnitel'nogo prava, 2007 / pod red. D.V. Dozhdeva. SPb., 2008. S. 7-28.
Iering f. Yuridicheskaya tekhnika / Izbrannye trud
Reference:
S.U. Kashkin.
Basic Trends of Development of Foreign, International
and European Law
// Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law. – 2011. – ¹ 5.
– P. 40-52.
Read the article
Abstract: The article analyses the evolution as a result of globalization of the interaction of national law, law of integration
and international law during the last 25 years. The mechanisms of legal regulation of social relations in integration
organizations are studied on the example of the European Union. Special attention is given to examination the new sources
of law and the dialectics of their application on the national, supranational and international levels. The new features
and qualitative characteristics of the EU law are dealt with. The author comes to the conclusion that with the formation of
the supranational law in the form of the European Union, being a separate system of law in itself, the former world system
of law has substantially changed. The stages of the evolution of the law of integration and its perspectives are formulated.
Keywords: Trends, international, national, integration, European, regional, regulation, mechanism, evolution, principles, sources, development.
References:
Andrianov A.N. K voprosu ob effektivnosti rezolyutsiy Soveta Bezopasnosti OON. Sovetskiy ezhegodnik mezhdunarodnogo prava. M., 1975.
Biryukov M.M. Evropeyskiy Soyuz, Evrokonstitutsiya i mezhdunarodnoe pravo. M., 2006.
Evropeyskiy soyuz: Osnovopolagayushchie akty v redaktsii Lissabonskogo dogovora s kommentariyami. M.: INFRA–M, 2008.
Kovalev A.A. Sovremennoe morskoe pravo i praktika ego primeneniya. M., 2003.
Kol'yar K. Mezhdunarodnye organizatsii i uchrezhdeniya. M., 1972. Kutafin O.E. Rossiyskiy konstitutsiona-lizm. M.: Norma, 2008. S. 50.
Marchenko M.N. Gosudarstvo i pravo v usloviyakh globalizatsii. M.: Prospekt, 2008.
Mezhdunarodnoe pravo. (V.G. Vittstum i dr.), Moskva–Berlin. 2010. Moiseev A.A. Mezhdunarodnye kredit-no–finansovye organizatsii. Pravovye aspekty deyatel'nosti. M., 2003.
Putin V.V. «Novyy integratsionnyy proekt dlya Evrazii — budushchee, kotoroe rozhdaetsya segodnya». Izvestiya 3 oktyabrya 2011 g.
Rossiya i Evropeyskiy Soyuz: Dokumenty i materialy / Pod re
Reference:
I.M. Mutay.
Transplantation and Restoration in Law
// Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law. – 2011. – ¹ 5.
– P. 53-64.
Read the article
Abstract: The subject of article is analysis of correlation of legal transplantation and following restoration of law in
private and public law. Author made conclusion about misrepresentation of transplanted law norms of western law in
post–socialistic countries as a result of underdevelopment of teleological interpretation of law norms.
Keywords: transplantation of law, restoration in law, private law, history of law, modernization of law, The Netherlands Civil Code, Napoleon Code, amendments
References:
Mezhdunarodnye pravovye akty:
1. Rezolyutsiya General'noi Assamblei OON ot 20 dekabrya 1971 g. ¹ 2857 (XXVI) «Smertnaya kazn'» // SPS «Ga-
rant», 2011. 10 sent.
2. Vtoroi Fakul'tativnyi Protokol k Mezhdunarodnomu paktu o grazhdanskikh i politicheskikh pravakh, na-
pravlennyi na otmenu smertnoi kazni (prinyat i otkryt dlya podpisaniya na 82–om plenarnom zasedanii Ge-
neral'noi Assamblei OON rezolyutsiei 44/128 ot 15 dekabrya 1989 g.) // Sovetskaya yustitsiya. 1992. ¹ 7–8. S. 38.
3. Soglashenie o partnerstve i sotrudnichestve, uchredivshee partnerstvo mezhdu Rossiei i Evropeiskimi so-
obshchestvami 24 iyunya 1994 g. // Konsul'tant–plyus. 2011. 17 sent.
4. Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on the Prevention of the Use
of the Financial System for the Purpose of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing 2005
Konstitutsionno–pravovye akty:
1. Constitution of the United States of America, Amendment XXII Ratified February 2
Reference:
B.I. Osminin.
Implementation of International Treaty Obligations
in the Domestic Legal System
of the United States of America.
// Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law. – 2011. – ¹ 5.
– P. 65-75.
Read the article
Abstract: Under art. VI, cl. 2 of the U.S. Constitution (the Supremacy Clause) all treaties concluded by the United States
are considered to be part of the supreme law of the land. Consequently, they are superior to State law, while they have
equal status to federal statutes. The Supremacy Clause has been interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court as also applying
to executive agreements.
Cases of inconsistency between a treaty and a statute will be resolved by means of the “last–in–time” rule. U.S. courts
will not apply international law, whether derived from treaty or from custom, in conflict with congressional enactment
that comes later in time: the courts have reasoned that “the latest expression of the sovereign will” should prevail.
U.S. courts have developed a distinction between “self–executing” and “non–self–executing” treaties; the former will be
directly applied by the courts but the latter must await implementation by the legislative or executive branches.
Keywords: the supreme law of the land, to give effect to international agreements within the U.S., the latest expression of the sovereign will, the “last–in–time” rule, implementing legislation, self–executing agreements, non–self–executing agreements, a presumption in favor of treaty self–execution, a presumption against treaty self–execution, the non–self– executing declaration.
References:
Yoo J. Treaties and Public Lawmaking: A Textual and Structural Defense of Non–Self–Execution // Columbia Law Review. 1999. Vol. 99
Yoo J. Globalism and the Constitution: Treaties, Non–Self–Execution, and the Original Understanding // Columbia Law Review. 1999. Vol. 99.
Paust J. International Law as Law of the United States: Trends and Prospects // Chinese Journal of International Law. 2002.
Paust J. Self–Executing Treaties. // The American Journal of International Law. 1988. Vol. 82.
Restatement (Third) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States. Vol. 1. The American Law Institute. 1987.
Sloss D. Treaties and Constitution: Enforcing Treaties Against the States. February 2011 // http://works.bepress. com/ david_sloss/2.
Turner J. The Post–Medellin Case for Legislative Standing // American University Law Review. 2010. Vol. 59.
Vazquez C. The Four Doctrines of Self–Executing Treaties // The American Journal of International Law. 1995. Vol. 89.
Vazquez C. Treaties as Law of the