This study is devoted to the problem of the relationship between judicial precedent and the analogy of law. The author, studying the nature of judicial law-making, notes that law-making activity is inherent in any body of the state, if the constitution does not directly prohibit it from creating new norms. The article provides a critique of the approach to understanding the analogy of law as a way of applying law. The author notes that it is impossible to apply abstract principles directly, the court, like a legislator, must first formulate a specific provision (rule of law) on the basis of them, and then apply it. Hence it is concluded that the analogy of law is a form of judicial precedent. Normative substantiation of the possibility of Russian courts to create law requires an answer to the question about the characteristics of the judicial norm and its place in the system of sources of modern Russian law. The author comes to the conclusion that the judicial norm is causal, special and retroactive, and it can take any place, with the exception of the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which can only be changed through the direct will of the people (chapters 1, 2, 9). The article also proposes to supplement the institution of analogy of law with norms on the mandatory request of the court considering the case to the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the creation of a judicial norm.

In the article, based on the analysis in the regulation of a historically valuable city-forming object, proposals for further improvement of regulatory regulation are formulated. The authors conclude that city-forming objects are a phenomenon of permanent properties, and therefore it is proposed to differentiate ordinary city-forming objects and historically valuable ones. This approach is based on the fact that urban formation is a process that takes place in modern market conditions and the properties of historical value to such objects begin to be given not by diachronous, but by their synchronous perception in the systemic ratio of the natural and man-made environment.

With the increase in the number of international legal obligations and the absence of centralized institutional enforcement, economic coercion has become increasingly widespread as a tool for ensuring compliance with international law. The purpose of this work is to study the concept of “sanctions / unilateral restrictive measures” in the framework of the political, legal and economic analysis. Due to the lack of a common understanding of the nature of unilateral restrictive measures, the author analyzes and highlights the main features of sanctions. Based on the features identified, the author formulated a definition that is universal for most modern jurisdictions. Sanctions are understood as extraterritorial measures and/or restrictions in the economic sector used by the initiating state (or a group of such states) unilaterally for the purpose of political coercion of the target state. The paper argues for the need for a clear separation of multilateral and unilateral sanctions, the latter of which do not have a sufficient degree of legality in terms of international law. A solution to the problem of the lack of an established standard for assessing the effectiveness of economic sanctions is also proposed by clearly specifying the criteria and fixing them in international practice and regulatory documents. It is concluded that the use of the term “restrictive economic measures” instead of the term “sanctions” is legally more correct. The necessity of unification of international legal norms regulating the procedure, possibility and consequences of the application of unilateral sanctions is pointed out.

The purpose of this article is to conduct a comparative analysis of the approaches established in Russian and foreign doctrine to the definition of the term “sanctions” (in the context of “international economic sanctions”). The author examines the content of the term “sanctions”, including through their typology, and also offers his own typology of international economic sanctions based on modern sanctions regulation. The relevance of the article is investigated due to the need to form unified doctrinal approaches to the definition of international economic sanctions. At the same time, the correct application of the category under consideration is of great scientific and practical importance. For a long time, the doctrine was dominated by the approach that sanctions should be understood exclusively as sanctions of the UN Security Council. This approach is still seen as correct from the standpoint of the conceptual and categorical apparatus of international law, but at the same time, it is outdated, not reflecting modern international economic sanctions. In the course of the research, the author comes to the conclusion that through the prism of modern practice of applying unilateral sanctions in scientific research, the term “sanctions” is used synonymously with the term “unilateral restrictive measures”. The article suggests a hypothesis about the possibility of moving away from the strictly formal approach of defining international sanctions exclusively as collective coercive measures. Of particular interest is the typology of sanctions proposed in the framework of the article as reflecting modern sanctions realities.

Article aims to compare the legal framework for ceasing of a state’s membership in the Council of Europe and Convention for the protection of Human Rights and Fundamental freedoms with the factual application of relevant framework in respect of the Russian Federation leaving the CoE in 2022. Analysis shows that foreseen procedures were o complied with, leading to defect actions and decision on the part of European party, and to somewhat inconsistent legal framework adopted in Russia. Lack of dialogue between the parties resulted in creation of two virtually unconnected legal realities. While the Council of Europe bodies and the Russian authorities apparently do not experience substantial adverse effects of this situation, the burden of such consequences is placed on the applicants, particularly on Russian citizens. It is assumed that very limited opportunities remain for interaction between Russian and European legal systems in terms of ensuring the rights of citizens.

The institutions of regulatory impact assessment (RIA) and evaluation of actual impact (EAI) contain deliberative procedures in the form of public consultations. Deliberative procedures serve as a basis for the legitimacy of legal norms, and legitimacy predetermines the effectiveness of norms. It is necessary to improve the process of public consultations, to overcome the existing problems. Institutions are options for forecasting and modeling in law. Improving the compilation of summary reports and conclusions in the framework of RIA and EAI will contribute to the quality of institutions. The importance of the categories of “purpose” and “goal-setting” in rulemaking in the context of synthesis reports is considered. The author formulates his own definition of RIA.

The article aims to test the author’s hypothesis that the right to favorable environment by its legal nature is rather closer to a principle than to a legal norm. The theoretical basis of the distinction between principle and norm of law is considered, special attention is paid to the study of the theory of the American lawyer and philosopher Ronald Dworkin. Relying on the concept of Dworkin, the author by the method of analogy provides arguments in support of his hypothesis. The confirmation of the proposed idea is also found in the decisions of international courts. Serious analysis of the legal framework, doctrinal sources and judicial practice was conducted in the course of writing the article.

The article substantiates the invalidity of the position formed in the Russian judicial practice about inadmissibility of compensation for physical and moral suffering caused to citizens as a result of offenses committed during the period of the Civil Codes of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic of 1922 and 1964. For this purpose, the author turns to the discussion of Soviet jurists on the admissibility of recovery of moral damages and evaluates the arguments of the parties for compliance with positive law. As a result, it is concluded that the inadmissibility of material compensation for non-pecuniary harm at that time was conditioned by arguments of a purely ideological nature and that there were no formal obstacles in Soviet civil legislation to the fi ling and satisfaction of such claims, which could be based on the rule of the general tort.

The article highlights points that are essential for defining the concept of an enterprise as an object of civil rights: features of the composition of the enterprise, the factor of combining its elements, as well as the main specifics of concluding and executing transactions regarding the enterprise. Using comparative legal analysis, the author criticizes the interpretation of an enterprise as an immovable property contained in the Civil Code.

The history of traditional societies constantly attracts the attention of the research community. The interest of both domestic and foreign scientists is observed both in early historical times and at the present stage. Among the issues of great interest to researchers are the peculiarities of the legal status of women in the traditional society of the peoples of the Caucasus of the XVII–XIX centuries. The author substantiates the relevance and significance of the research topic. The purpose of the article is to identify the features of the legal status of women in the traditional society of the peoples of the Caucasus of the XVII–XIX centuries. The article uses general scientific and specific methods of historical and historiographical research, including methods of objectivity and comparative analysis. The article analyzes the specific features of the legal vulnerability of women of the peoples of the Caucasus, in this regard, the status of the status of women according to Adat and Sharia seems interesting. The article provides a brief justification of the role and significance of the development of customary law, since a dual system of customary law (adat) and Sharia has developed in the Caucasus. The analysis of the scientific literature allowed us to conclude that the absence of a state system and state law contributed to the long-term preservation of the adat in the Caucasus. It is postulated that there are three types of customary law: customary law before the reformation (from the XV to the XIX centuries), reformed customary law (from the second half of the XIX to the beginning of the XX centuries) and customary law of the Soviet and post-Soviet period (from 1920 to the 1990s). The article also examines the peculiarities of property and inheritance rights, as well as the formation of feminism as a social movement for women’s rights in the traditional society of the peoples of the Caucasus of the XVII–XIX centuries. The author comes to the conclusion that it is necessary to further improve institutional mechanisms to ensure compliance with Sharia and Adat laws.

The article is devoted to mediation as consensual method of dispute resolution within the framework of the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention. The authors justify the advantages of mediation with a view to secure the best interests of a child. In particular, mediation may facilitate more expedited return of a child when compared to court procedures as well as exert a positive impact on its emotional status. Although mediation itself is not mentioned in the convention, Hague Conference on Private International Law managed to fill the said gap by the publication of the mediation guide applicable to cross-border transfer and retention of children. Apart from the analysis of the guide, authors provide examples of court rulings involving international disputes and illustrating the attempts to introduce mediation into international child abduction cases at the initiative of the court or central authority as well the parents of the removed or retained child. Unfortunately, such attempts prove to be unsuccessful in the overwhelming majority of cases, therefore the work aimed at implementation of mediation into such disputes should be intensified.

This study is aimed at considering topical international legal problems of ensuring international security in the modern environment of environmental and nuclear law. Within the framework of this article, special emphasis is placed on the fact that in the current conditions of international relations, the authority of international law has been significantly undermined in recent years, which is why it is necessary to reaffirm the belief in the inviolability and necessity of the existence of the international legal system as a guarantor of the continued existence of mankind in a stable and inviolable international peace and security. The author draws attention to the fact that one of the possible ways to raise the value of general international law can be the modernization of international legal consciousness, which should be filled with a qualitatively new content, due to the need to solve problems associated with the growth of new threats and challenges to the existence of mankind.