2019
DOI: 10.17223/15617793/438/26
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Court’s Decision on the Presence of Abuse of Right in the Act of a Person and Its Consequences

Abstract: На основе результатов изучения практики, произведенного авторами в 2016-2018 гг., предлагаются определение злоупотребления правом в уголовном процессе, критерии отграничения злоупотребления правом от правомерного поведения; рассматриваются решения, принимаемые судом в ситуациях, в которых констатируется наличие злоупотребления правом со стороны участников уголовного процесса, предлагаются требования к таким решениям, обстоятельства, которые суду необходимо учитывать при их принятии. Ключевые слова: принятие су… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Liability for misconduct of a judge that discredits the authority of the judiciary should be determined by the QBJ of the appropriate level and status of the court. This situation 1869 may occur when a judge's procedural decision formally violates the law, but does not have the quality of socially harmful (Andreeva & Trubnikova, 2019), or does not cause negative consequences. Special requirements to the conditions and the procedure of taking disciplinary action against a judge set forth by the legislator in the existing normative-legal acts are: the Federal Constitutional Law "On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation", "On Arbitration Courts in the Russian Federation", "On Courts of General Jurisdiction in the Russian Federation", "On the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation", RF Law "On Status of Judges in the Russian Federation»; The Federal law "On Bodies of Judicial Community in the Russian Federation", "On Magistrate Judges in the Russian Federation", the Code of Judicial Ethics, the Rules of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, Regulations on the operation of the Qualification Board of Judges, the Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation "On Approval of the Regulations on the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation".…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Liability for misconduct of a judge that discredits the authority of the judiciary should be determined by the QBJ of the appropriate level and status of the court. This situation 1869 may occur when a judge's procedural decision formally violates the law, but does not have the quality of socially harmful (Andreeva & Trubnikova, 2019), or does not cause negative consequences. Special requirements to the conditions and the procedure of taking disciplinary action against a judge set forth by the legislator in the existing normative-legal acts are: the Federal Constitutional Law "On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation", "On Arbitration Courts in the Russian Federation", "On Courts of General Jurisdiction in the Russian Federation", "On the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation", RF Law "On Status of Judges in the Russian Federation»; The Federal law "On Bodies of Judicial Community in the Russian Federation", "On Magistrate Judges in the Russian Federation", the Code of Judicial Ethics, the Rules of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, Regulations on the operation of the Qualification Board of Judges, the Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation "On Approval of the Regulations on the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation".…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%