No 4 (2025)

The subject of this article is an analysis of the criterion of non-execution (not fulfilled or partially fulfilled) as a special limit on the review of judicial acts. The author describes the history of the emergence and development of the criterion of non-fulfillment in the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and in legislation, provides critiques of the criterion found in literature, its transformation into a criterion for the reviewing a judicial act, and also raises questions about the future of the criterion of non-fulfillment in the system of judicial act review given its modernization. Additionally, based on the characteristic of the specificity of the criterion of non-fulfillment, the author puts forward a hypothesis about the special legal nature of a number of new circumstances (recognition of a norm/its interpretation as unconstitutional, determination or change of the practice of norm application, cancellation of a regulatory act in the course of administrative norm control). The research employs methods such as historical, systemic, axiological, formal-legal, functional, sociological methods, as well as analysis, synthesis, and modeling. The author concludes that despite the fact that the criterion of non-fulfillment is currently formally almost excluded from legal practice, fully abandoning it is premature. In the systematization of legislation on the review of judicial acts, this criterion may be taken into account (with appropriate refinement). The author hypothesizes that the legal nature of the circumstances to which the criterion of non-fulfillment may be applied falls outside the concept of new circumstances and indicates the need to distinguish them into a separate group of grounds for reviewing judicial acts. Considering that in legal reality there are still several situations to which the review mechanisms for newly discovered and new circumstances apply because procedural legislation lacks other tools for a court to review its own act, it is proposed to modernize the content of procedural codes in this part. The results of the work can be used for the development of procedural legislation and the formation of a more coherent view of the system for reviewing judicial acts (extra-institutional and institutional stages), as well as in the educational process when studying relevant disciplines.

The article explores the legal status of «Technology Transfer Acceleration Companies (TTAC)», a public-scientific partnership transfer invented in France, which enables two or more universities, research institutes, etc., with the participation and financial support of public authorities, to transform jointly the outcomes of their research into new technologies and innovative products with the aim of marketing. Philosophical and general scientific methods in conjunction with specific methodology of modern jurisprudence and other social sciences (induction and deduction, analysis and synthesis; historical-legal, comparative-legal methods; empirical analysis, method of processing economic and statistical information, etc.). The article is the first in Russia comprehensive legal study of TTAC against the background of worldwide experience in the legal regulation of technology transfer from the scientific sector to business environment. The article demonstrates the importance, complexity and ambiguity of the technology transfer, including legal understanding of this phenomenon in various legal systems as well as at the international level. With respect to French law, the article delineates the meanings of «technology transfer» and of the broader legal concept «valorization» (of scientific research and its results). The author establishes, that in France which resembles Russia by its adherence to the statist (presuming an active role of public authorities) approaches in both scientific and economic policies, the creation of the TTAC can be explained by the aspiration of the French authorities to reorganize technology transfer on common footing, albeit with the help of non-command and administrative levers, but financial incentives (governmental grants in favor of TTAC). The article identifies the fundamental sources and principles governing the TTAC, their achievements and problems. In practical aspect, the authors puts forward a proposal to create the similar common transfer vehicles in Russian, initially as part of a legal experimentation.

The relevance of studying the principle of maintaining citizens' trust in the law and government actions stems from its pivotal role in ensuring the stability of legal systems and the legitimacy of state governance. The contradictions between, on the one hand, the principle of trust in governmental actions – demanding legal certainty and stability – and, on the other hand, the flexibility of state administration highlight the necessity for a systemic analysis of mechanisms implementing this principle. The study aims to identify theoretical and practical aspects of protecting legitimate (lawful) expectations as an element of the principle of trust in governmental actions within the framework of comparative jurisprudence, as well as to determine its place in the Russian legal system through the synthesis of foreign experience and national law enforcement trends. The methodological foundation includes a comparative legal analysis of foreign doctrines and Russian practices, a historical-legal method for reconstructing the evolution of the principle, and a formal-legal analysis of regulatory acts and rulings of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The scientific novelty lies in the systemic examination of the interplay between legitimate expectations and institutions of procedural fairness and legal certainty across jurisdictions, as well as the synthesis of foreign concepts (e.g., the German principle of Vertrauensschutz, French sécurité juridique, and Anglo-American legitimate expectations) with Russian law enforcement approaches. The study proposes a classification of the grounds for legitimate expectations (individual assurances, established practices, regulatory acts). Research results revealed differences in the doctrine’s interpretation across legal systems: procedural protection in the UK, compensatory models in France, constitutional trust principles in Germany, and public interest prioritization in Canada and Australia. The Russian principle of maintaining trust in the law and governmental actions distinguishes between “lawful” and “legitimate” expectations and is implemented through legislative and enforcement dimensions. A critical analysis identified contradictions and challenges in practical implementation, leading to the formulation of development trends: unification of criteria for evaluating expectations, including clear definitions of their legal validity and protection mechanisms.

The article is dedicated to the analysis of the specialist's participation in the examination of electronic evidence at the trial stage of criminal cases. The purpose of the work is to define the role of the specialist as a subject possessing special knowledge and to identify areas of their activity that contribute to ensuring the completeness and reliability of the examination of electronic information at the judicial stages of criminal proceedings. The subject of this work is the legal status and practical aspects of the specialist's participation in the examination of electronic evidence in criminal proceedings. The object of the study is the criminal procedural legal relations arising in connection with the participation of the specialist in the examination of electronic evidence at the trial stage. Within the framework of the study, an analysis of the current criminal procedural legislation is conducted, and proposals aimed at improving legal regulation are formulated. The article employs general scientific dialectical methods of cognition, a formal legal method for analyzing the norms of criminal procedural legislation regarding the participation of specialists in criminal proceedings, as well as evidence and proof. Logical methods (induction, deduction, analysis, and synthesis) are applied to generalize scientific recommendations and law enforcement practices related to the topic of the work. The scientific novelty of the study lies in the comprehensive analysis of the procedural status of the specialist as a person assisting the court and the parties during the examination of electronic evidence. The article discusses the functions of the specialist, which are explicitly provided for by criminal procedural legislation, and reveals the peculiarities of their implementation in the context of working with electronic information. The main conclusion of the conducted research is the identification of new forms of the specialist's participation, which are determined by the specifics of electronic evidence and have not received normative consolidation but are promising in terms of the development of criminal proceedings in the context of digitalization. These include copying and fixing the properties of copied electronic data, identifying signs of their falsification (such as "deepfakes"), as well as eliminating technical malfunctions that hinder the proper examination of electronic evidence in court. The proposed functions of the specialist could help reduce the risks of loss or distortion of electronic evidence and ensure the compliance of procedural rights of participants to present and examine evidence. The implementation of these forms of the specialist's participation is possible through amendments to Article 58 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation aimed at expanding the list of their procedural functions.

This article is dedicated to the analysis of the legal regulation of the provision of natural resources for use in the Russian Federation and related issues concerning the registration of information in state registers, as well as some other related areas. The purpose of the study is to examine changes in natural resource legislation, which have manifested in the transition from a licensing approach to civil law principles in resource use and their reflection in related legislation and law enforcement. The tasks of the research are: to analyze changes in the legal regulation of licensing the use of subsoil resources, water bodies, wildlife, and forest resources; to identify problems arising in law enforcement practice in connection with changes in natural resource legislation and related legislation, particularly in tax legislation and in the management of the Unified State Register of Legal Entities (EGRUL) and the Unified State Register of Individual Entrepreneurs (EGRIP). The methodological framework of the research consists of general scientific methods of analysis and synthesis, a formal-legal method, and a comparative-legal method. Publicly available data from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities and a comparative analysis of this data with information from the State Register of Subsoil Areas provided for use and licenses for subsoil use were analyzed for the study. As a result of the research, changes in the legal regulation of the use of various types of natural resources over recent decades were identified, specifically the replacement of licenses with contracts and permits regarding water bodies, wildlife, and forest resources. These changes also influenced the adoption of corresponding amendments to the legislation on licensing certain types of activities and several other laws. The mentioned changes affected problems in law enforcement related to discrepancies in the Tax Code of the Russian Federation concerning water tax and errors in the input of license information by government bodies in the unified state register of legal entities and individual entrepreneurs; it was established that the data in EGRUL and EGRIP do not correspond to valid licenses and current regulatory practices. A conclusion was drawn regarding the existence of conflicts and inconsistencies in law enforcement in the field of natural resource licensing that require resolution.