Journal headings
"Legal sciences"

Annotation: The presented article is devoted to the investigation of iatrogenic crimes (crimes caused by medical errors in the provision of medical care). The relevance of the stated topic is dictated by acute social sensitivity to medi- cal violations, the importance of the object of encroachment (human life and health), as well as the continuing difficulties in proving criminal cases in this category. The novelty of the author’s approach to the problem is not the proposal of theoretical recommendations, “how to investigate” criminal cases of the analyzed category, but the analysis of violations, on the basis of which specific application rules are formulated, “how NOT to” conduct an investigation. The aspect related to conducting commission forensic medical examinations of the quality of medical care provided is considered in detail. Typical violations of investigators in evaluating expert opinions have been identified. It has been revealed that these evidences are not always reasonably given priority. The judicial practice of the courts passing acquittals against medical workers in connection with the incompleteness or incorrect assessment of expert opinions is analyzed. Typical violations of investigators in assessing the expert opinions received have been identified. It has been re- vealed that these evidences are not always reasonably given priority. The article analyzes the judicial practice of courts passing acquittals against medical workers due to incomplete or incorrect assessment of expert opinions. This work can be used both in the investigative and judicial practice of investigation and consideration of criminal cases of iatrogenic crimes, and for the development of further theoretical provisions on the issue under study. In the text of the article, the Russian Federation is abbreviated as RF.

Annotation: The relevance of the topic under consideration lies in the importance of determining and comparing certain properties of law enforcement acts issued by the courts that ensure achieving the goals of civil proceedings. Unmotivated and unfounded court ruling cannot be considered an act of justice, as it lacks certain motives that justify the conclusions of the court set out in the reasoning part. The purpose of the study is to investigate the essence, procedural significance of motivation and validity of court rulings, as well as a comparative analysis of these properties. The author uses methods of scientific cognition of a general nature (logical and system analysis, synthesis), private legal methods of cognition (legal-technical, comparative). As a result, it is concluded that a judicial act in a civil case should not be unmotivated and (or) unfounded, taking into account that these proper- ties equally ensure the procedural legal effect of a court decision, defining it as a judicial act and influencing its legal force, determined by other properties such as commitment, immutability, irrefutability, exclusivity, prejudice, enforceability. In the text of the article, the Russian Federation is abbreviated as RF.

Annotation: This article is devoted to the study of the problem of abuse of the right to appeal the verdict by defense counsel and defendants. Despite the fact that this constitutional right is designed to protect the legitimate interests of the parties, it is often used as a tool to resolve private issues, which not only contradicts the main objectives of criminal proceedings, specified in Article 6 of the Criminal Procedural Code (hereinafter — CPC) of Russian Federation, but also violates the rights and legitimate interests of other participants in criminal proceedings. The main obstacle to combating such abuses is the formal compliance of the content of appeals with the norms of the CPC of Russian Federation. The actions of unscrupulous appellants entail a number of negative consequences, which should include an increase in the workload of appellate bodies, violation of the principle of reasonable time of criminal proceedings, evasion of defendants from criminal responsibility as a result of the expiration of the statute of limitations. The article cites examples from law enforcement practice that contradict the applicants’ desire for justice, correction of judicial errors or restoration of their violated rights. The authors of the article conclude that it is necessary to improve Article 389.6 of the CPC of Russian Federation by clarifying the criteria for admissibility of appellate complaints (submissions). In the text of the article, the Russian Federation is abbreviated as RF.

Annotation: Bankruptcy has occupied an important niche in the life of society over the past decades. This conclusion is confirmed by the prevalence of the category of cases related to the insolvency of economic entities and individuals in the arbitra- tion case file. The purpose of the bankruptcy procedure is either to restore the debtor’s solvency, or the most effective settlement of debts owed to creditors. Achieving these two goals is possible through the sale of the debtor’s property, and therefore instruments of replenishment of the bankruptcy estate are of particular interest to civil lawyers, among which subsidiary liability and challenging invalid transactions are the most prominent. In this article, the author conducts a study of the mechanisms for challenging invalid transactions in insolvency (bankruptcy) cases based on theoretical and practical sources. A consistent analysis allowed us to identify three key models of challenging, including: out-of-competition challenging, competitive challenging, and challenging creditors’ claims when they are included in the register. Gaps in legal regulation have been identified, the elimination of which is critically important for the formation of a monotonous judicial practice, as well as the stability of legal relations and the rule of law. In the text of the article, the Russian Federation is abbreviated as RF.

Annotation: This article analyzes the international legal problems of sanctions imposed by European states against Russia fr om the standpoint of democratic principles of modern states and sovereignty of states, and offers a critical view of Western anti-Russian propaganda justifying sanctions. The article concludes that the West's "demoniza- tion" of Russia is based not on actions that significantly distinguish it from the rest of the world, but on the need inherent in state systems to create an enemy in order to assert their superiority. The object of criticism is those Western propagandas that, based on immoral manipulative dynamics, cope well with constructing an enemy only because they are disguised as a convincing, at least outwardly, ideological goal based on democratic principles. In reality, such mechanisms conceal strategies for the struggle for power in violation of the basic principles and norms of international law, going far beyond the territory wh ere wars are being waged, that is, into geopolitical games with economic and geographical interests on a much larger scale. Throughout the text of the article, the Russian Federation is abbreviated as RF.