FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3204385807> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3204385807 startingPage "2" @default.
• W3204385807 abstract "EnglishThe article is devoted to a comparative legal study of the European principle of proportionality and the American method of weighing interests, their origins, common and distinctive features, socio-cultural and historical foundations, the application of the principle of proportionality in the Russian legal order. Historically, the origins (roots) of the European principle of proportionality go back to the German administrative-legal doctrine, and the American method of weighing as an initial principle is associated with private law and only later was extended to the public law sphere. The article assesses the impact of these principles on the Russian legal doctrine and law enforcement practice.Purpose: The main purpose of the article is to identify the general and distinctive features of the European principle of proportionality and the American method of balancing interests in order to comprehend on this basis the Russian legal model for ensuring the balance of private and public interests. Tasks: to explore the historical, socio-cultural, doctrinal foundations of the genesis of the European principle of proportionality and the American method of weighing interests; to identify the common and special features characteristic of these methods; to show the influence of these methods on Russian doctrine and law enforcement practice; compare the Russian principle of balance between private and public interests with the European principle of proportionality; formulate recommendations and suggestions for improving Russian law enforcement practice.Methods: historical and legal, logical, formal and legal, systemic and structural, method of interdisciplinary legal research, method of system analysis.Discussion: the European principle of proportionality and the American method of weighing interests, although they do not belong to new phenomena of legal thought, nevertheless, due to their fundamental importance both at the constitutional and other sectoral levels of development of law, are constantly in the center of the field of vision of legal thought abroad, as well as in Russia. The emergence of various approaches to understanding the legal provision of the balance of private and public interests is causing lively, sometimes quite sharp, discussions in the scientific field. The article focuses on the historical, socio-cultural, political and legal features of the development of the European principle of proportionality and the American method of balancing interests, which leads to both close interaction and convergence, as well as the need for their joint scientific research, which can give a significant theoretical and practical effect.Conclusion: the article states that the distinctive features of the European principle of proportionality and the American method of weighing interests are not of an essential, paradigmatic nature, which allows us to conclude that in this case there are no grounds for a fundamental opposition to each other of the above-named constructive models as methods of understanding legal reality, as well as legal means of ensuring a balance of private and public interests. The development of the European principle of proportionality has a significant impact and impact on the formation of Russian political and legal thought and practice in the field of interaction between private and public law, ensuring an organic combination of private and public interests, which is reflected in the legal position formulated by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation concerning the principle of ensuring proportional observance, balance of private and public interests in the implementation of legal regulation of public relations. portuguesO artigo e dedicado a um estudo juridico comparativo do principio europeu da proporcionalidade e do metodo americano de ponderar interesses, suas origens, caracteristicas comuns e distintivas, fundamentos socioculturais e historicos, a aplicacao do principio da proporcionalidade na ordem juridica russa. Historicamente, as origens (raizes) do principio europeu da proporcionalidade remontam a doutrina administrativa-juridica alema, e o metodo americano de ponderacao como principio inicial esta associado ao direito privado e so mais tarde foi estendido a esfera do direito publico. O artigo avalia o impacto desses principios na doutrina russa e na pratica de aplicacao da lei.Objetivo: O objetivo principal do artigo e identificar as caracteristicas gerais e distintivas do principio europeu de proporcionalidade e o metodo americano de equilibrar interesses, a fim de compreender, com base nisso, o modelo juridico russo para garantir o equilibrio de interesses publicos e privados.Tarefas: explorar os fundamentos historicos, socioculturais e doutrinarios da genese do principio europeu da proporcionalidade e do metodo americano de ponderar interesses; identificar caracteristicas comuns e especiais caracteristicas desses metodos; mostrar a influencia desses metodos na doutrina russa e na pratica da aplicacao da lei; comparar o principio russo de equilibrio entre interesses publicos e privados com o principio europeu de proporcionalidade; formular recomendacoes e sugestoes para melhorar as praticas de aplicacao da lei na Russia.Metodos: historico e juridico, logico, formal e juridico, sistemico e estrutural, metodo de pesquisa juridica intersetorial, metodo de analise de sistemas.Discussao: o principio europeu da proporcionalidade e o metodo americano de ponderar interesses, embora nao pertencam a novos fenomenos do pensamento juridico, no entanto, devido a sua importância fundamental, tanto nos niveis constitucionais quanto em outros setores do desenvolvimento do direito, estao constantemente no centro do campo de visao do pensamento juridico. no exterior, bem como na Russia. O surgimento de varias abordagens para entender a provisao legal da balanca de interesses privados e publicos esta causando discussoes animadas, as vezes bastante acentuadas, no campo cientifico. O artigo enfoca as caracteristicas historicas, socioculturais, politicas e legais do desenvolvimento do principio europeu da proporcionalidade e o metodo americano de equilibrar interesses, o que leva a uma interacao e convergencia proximas, bem como a necessidade de sua pesquisa cientifica conjunta, o que pode dar um efeito teorico e pratico significativo.Conclusao: o artigo afirma que as caracteristicas distintivas do principio europeu da proporcionalidade e do metodo americano de ponderacao de interesses nao sao de natureza paradigmatica essencial, o que nos permite concluir que, neste caso, nao ha fundamento para uma oposicao fundamental entre si dos modelos construtivos acima mencionados como metodos de compreensao juridica. realidade, bem como meios legais para garantir um equilibrio de interesses publicos e privados. O desenvolvimento do principio europeu da proporcionalidade tem um impacto significativo na formacao do pensamento e das praticas politicas e juridicas russas no campo da interacao entre direito privado e publico, garantindo uma combinacao orgânica de interesses privados e publicos, o que se reflete na posicao juridica formulada pelo Tribunal Constitucional da Federacao da Russia sobre o principio de garantir proporcionalidade. observância, equilibrio de interesses privados e publicos na implementacao da regulamentacao legal das relacoes publicas." @default.
• W3204385807 created "2021-10-11" @default.
• W3204385807 creator A5014501921 @default.
• W3204385807 creator A5055050182 @default.
• W3204385807 creator A5071792459 @default.
• W3204385807 creator A5072140788 @default.
• W3204385807 creator A5083145333 @default.
• W3204385807 date "2020-01-01" @default.
• W3204385807 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W3204385807 title "The constitutional principle of proportionality in foreign and Russian law: a theoretical and practical analysis" @default.
• W3204385807 hasPublicationYear "2020" @default.
• W3204385807 type Work @default.
• W3204385807 sameAs 3204385807 @default.
• W3204385807 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W3204385807 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3204385807 hasAuthorship W3204385807A5014501921 @default.
• W3204385807 hasAuthorship W3204385807A5055050182 @default.
• W3204385807 hasAuthorship W3204385807A5071792459 @default.
• W3204385807 hasAuthorship W3204385807A5072140788 @default.
• W3204385807 hasAuthorship W3204385807A5083145333 @default.
• W3204385807 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W3204385807 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W3204385807 hasConcept C183763965 @default.
• W3204385807 hasConcept C190253527 @default.
• W3204385807 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W3204385807 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W3204385807 hasConceptScore W3204385807C162324750 @default.
• W3204385807 hasConceptScore W3204385807C17744445 @default.
• W3204385807 hasConceptScore W3204385807C183763965 @default.
• W3204385807 hasConceptScore W3204385807C190253527 @default.
• W3204385807 hasConceptScore W3204385807C199539241 @default.
• W3204385807 hasConceptScore W3204385807C33923547 @default.
• W3204385807 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W3204385807 hasLocation W32043858071 @default.
• W3204385807 hasOpenAccess W3204385807 @default.
• W3204385807 hasPrimaryLocation W32043858071 @default.
• W3204385807 hasVolume "16" @default.
• W3204385807 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3204385807 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3204385807 magId "3204385807" @default.
• W3204385807 workType "article" @default.