Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

Wyszukujesz frazę "Civil law," wg kryterium: Temat


Wyświetlanie 1-2 z 2
Tytuł:
Взгляды профессора Е. В. Васьковского на систему российского гражданского права и современность
Autorzy:
Andriej, Szerstobitow,
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/902370.pdf
Data publikacji:
2017-11-08
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego
Tematy:
E. V. Vaskovski
civil law system
property law
“intellectual property” law
“the dualism of private law”
“commercialization of civil law”
Opis:
The article is devoted to the views of Professor E. V. Vaskovsky on the system of Russian civil law of the late XIX beginning of XX centuries. Giving a presentation on the civil law system E. V. Vaskovsky, first of all, emphasizes the feasibility of isolation in a special section of the general part. The most important parts of civil law system, he believes property law, law of obligations, family law and inheritance law, constitute a special part of civil law. Author composed of sections, which are section of the special part of civil law, including the rights materialized, embodies the bearer. Summing up the views of E. V. Vaskovsky on the system of civil law, it should be noted that along with the traditional inclusion of family law, the novella is extremely large character that took place in the end of XIX century in the field of legal regulation of intellectual creativity, and found in it reflected. Further, the article presents a generalized analysis of the current system of the Russian civil law. The concept of the civil law system, all also based on the division into the general and special part. Now, however, in the civil law system is allocated a number of subbrunches. Selecting subbrunches of the modern civil law associates with the isolation of each of them with their own general part. Currently, the structure of the special part of civil law includes the following subbrunches: corporate law; property law; inheritance law; law of obligations; the law of “intellectual property”; commercial law. Historical experience has shown that the “materialized rights” that E. V. Vaskovsky also singled out in the structure of the special part of civil law did not subbrunch of the modern Russian civil law, as the rapid development of the stock exchange trade resulted in the so-called “dematerialization” of securities, which is the main instrument of the stock market. Currently, the data set of rules should be considered as one of the most important institutions of commercial law as a subbrunch of modern civil law.
Źródło:
Studia Iuridica; 2017, 70; 227-239
0137-4346
Pojawia się w:
Studia Iuridica
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
A Common Law Perspective on the Supreme Court and its Functions
Autorzy:
Richard, Marcus,
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/902705.pdf
Data publikacji:
2019-10-26
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego
Tematy:
Supreme Court
civil law system
common law system
Sąd Najwyższy
system kontynentalny
system common law
Opis:
The text presents different attributes of the Supreme Court in common law and civil law systems. The author claims that the question of design and function of a supreme court, while important, is no more significant than the issue of its institutional status and evolution, i.e. something one could refer to as “legal culture”. Neither the “common law camp”, nor the “civil law camp” turns out to be monolithic in this regard. The distinctive history of the US Supreme Court is presented through the perspective of its statutory and procedural supremacy, as well as its power of constitutional adjudication. The author indicates that the supremacy of the US Supreme Court depends on many factors. Arguably, the most important attribute of the US Supreme Court’s supremacy is linked with the latitude offered to judges in common law system to “make law”, which stands in contrast to a limited judicial function in many civil law countries. The author argues that being a court in a common law system carries with it much broader authority. A supreme court in such a system is, as a result, much more supreme. The author concludes his comparative remarks by saying that it is not possible to proclaim the superiority of one specific system because there are too many variables that come into play with regard to respective nations.
Źródło:
Studia Iuridica; 2019, 81; 15-43
0137-4346
Pojawia się w:
Studia Iuridica
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
    Wyświetlanie 1-2 z 2

    Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies