scholarly journals Features of the Criminal Liability for Crimes in the Sphere of Entrepreneurial and Other Economic Activities

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 118-121
Author(s):  
S I Merkushina
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Economic Activities ◽  
The Supreme Court

The article analyzes the explanations contained in the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court on 15/11/2016 № 48«On the practice of courts of legislation regulating particular criminal responsibility for crimes in the sphere of entrepreneurial and othereconomic activities».

scholarly journals Consequences of failure to pay a court fine

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 639-650
Author(s):  
Nina Yu. Skripchenko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Legislative Regulation

The article discusses issues that arose during enforcement of the new grounds for exemption from criminal responsibility, enshrined in 2016, in connection with a court fine (Article 76.2 of the Criminal Code). Despite the criticism of its legislative regulation, demand for a new way of ceasing criminal prosecution began to appear in connection with the non-payment of a fine. Having determined the voluntary execution of a court fine, the legislator did not settle the issue of the further execution of the fine in cases where there are valid reasons for non-payment. After analyzing the existing proposals to solve this problem, the author confirms that the elimination of the gap would be facilitated by the legislative obligation of the bailiff to establish the circumstances by which the judicial penalty is not paid, as well as the addition of the list of decisions made by the bailiff to suspend enforcement proceeding. Analysis of judicial practice showed that Art. 76.2 of the Criminal Code began to be applied in cases where the court has justification for implementing less onerous grounds for the defendant to be exempt from criminal liability. Legislative duplication of the conditions under which criminal prosecution can be terminated for various reasons calls into question the wide alternative of the latter, as well as the embodiment of the idea of humanizing criminal law, which is the basis for securing a new ground for exemption from criminal liability. The article substantiates the proposal to supplement the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court dated June 27, 2013 with a provision allowing the release of a person from criminal responsibility with a judicial fine in cases where the court has no basis for suspending criminal prosecution for unconditional types of exemption from criminal liability. The author draws attention to the gap in the legislation, part 3 of Article 78 of the Criminal Code, which is related to the renewal of the statute of limitations for criminal liability when an individual avoids paying a court fine.

scholarly journals Los criterios jurisprudenciales para exigir responsabilidad penal a las personas jurídicas en el delito corporativo

2019 ◽  
pp. 327
Author(s):  
Miguel Ángel Morales Hernández
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Corporate Crime ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Entity ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Points Of View ◽  
Object Of Study ◽  
Derecho Penal

Las recientes reformas del Código Penal Español han supuesto una verdadera revolución en el ámbito de la responsabilidad penal de las personas jurídicas. A raíz de las mismas, el Tribunal Supremo ha dictado una serie de sentencias que han arrojado bastante luz acerca de cuáles han de ser los elementos o requisitos que configuran la base para la atribución de la responsabilidad penal a la persona jurídica. Analizando dichas sentencias, puede observarse el reconocimiento del delito corporativo, caracterizado por contar con sus propios elementos, distintos a los exigibles a las personas físicas. Pues bien: este trabajo tiene como principal objeto de estudio la doctrina del Tribunal Supremo sobre esta materia con la finalidad de inferir cuál es la posible configuración del delito corporativo en atención a estos pronunciamientos jurisprudenciales, a los principios del derecho penal, así como al propio tenor literal de la ley. Ante esta situación, diferentes autores se han ido posicionando acerca de la fundamentación de la responsabilidad penal de las personas jurídicas; así como de la concreta estructura del delito corporativo. Se analizan también sus diferentes puntos de vista señalando que sus visiones del tema son muy dispares.Recent reforms of the Spanish Penal Code have supposed a real revolution in the area of criminal liability of legal entity. As a result of that, the Supreme Court has issued a series of judgments that shed light on which should be the elements or requirements that form the basis for the attribution of criminal responsibility to the legal entity. Analyzing these jurisprudential pronouncements, we can observe the recognition of corporate crime, characterized by having its own elements, different from those required of natural persons. Well, this work has as its main object of study the doctrine of the Supreme Court on this matter with the purpose of inferring what is the possible configuration of the corporate crime in attention to these jurisprudential pronouncements, to the principles of criminal law, as well as to the own literal tenor of the law. Faced with this situation, different authors have been positioning themselves on the basis of the criminal liability of legal entity; as well as the concrete structure of corporate crime. Their different points of view are also analyzed, pointing out that their views on the subject are very different.

scholarly journals Glosa do wyroku Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 17 października 2018 r. (II KK 73/18)

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 291
Author(s):  
Cezary Kulesza
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Complex Behaviour ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Bank Employees ◽  
The Impact

<p class="PreformattedText">The gloss refers to the problem of the impact of bank employees’ performance on borrowers’ liability for fraud. The author approves the view formulated in the thesis of the Supreme Court that the employees of the injured bank were obliged to exercise special diligence in checking the accuracy of the documents submitted by the accused necessary to obtain a loan. The position taken by the Supreme Court in the commented judgement can be considered as at least a partial departure from the previous jurisprudence of the Supreme Court accepting that the victim’s contribution to the occurrence of fraud is not relevant to the responsibility of the perpetrators. The author, starting from the results of victimological research, accepts the view that the basis of criminal liability for fraud is the complex behaviour of the perpetrator (extraneous) and representatives of the injured bank (intraneus) and their mutual activity. In the last part of the commentary, the author indicates the specific obligations of banks when granting loans. He also emphasizes the inclusion in civil law of the victim’s contribution to damage as a basis for its mitigation.</p>

scholarly journals Novels of the Criminal Code on responsibility for abusesin public procurement: background and problems of qualification

2018 ◽  
pp. 34-43
Author(s):  
A. Ya. Asnis
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Public Procurement ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Service Contract ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Contract Managers

The article deals with the criminological grounds and background of the adoption of the Federal law of April 23, 2018 № 99-FZ, which introduced criminal liability for abuse in the procurement of goods, works and services for state or municipal needs (Art. 2004 of Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and for bribery of employees of contract service, contract managers, members of the Commission on the implementation of the procurement of persons engaged in the acceptance of the delivered goods, performed works or rendered services, other authorized persons, representing interests of customer in the scope of the relevant procurement (Art. 2005 of the Criminal Code).The author formulates private rules of qualification of the corresponding crimes and differentiation of their structures from structures of adjacent crimes and administrative offenses. The necessity of changing the position of the legislator regarding generic and direct objects of these crimes, the adoption of a special resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation to explain the practice of applying the relevant innovations.

scholarly journals On the Issues of the Application of Part 6 of Article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 79-84
Author(s):  
N. N. Korotkikh
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article analyzes some of the controversial, in the opinion of the author, recommendations of the Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 10 of 15.05.2018 «On the practice of the courts applying the provisions of paragraph 6 Article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation». Lowering the category of crime always requires clear criteria by which the actions of the defendant could be qualified with a change in the gravity of the crime. Based on examples from judicial practice, the thesis is substantiated that “taking into account the factual circumstances of the case” and “the degree of its public danger” are evaluative e criteria and do not always allow to decide the validity of the application of part 6 article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The discrepancy between some of the recommendations contained in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the provisions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is shown. It is concluded that it is impossible to exempt a person from criminal liability on the grounds specified in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

Corporate Criminal Liability for the Criminal Offences in Lithuania

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomas Girdenis ◽  
Marius Laurinaitis ◽  
Irmantas Rotomskis ◽  
Raimundas Jurka
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Financial Reports ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Illegal Activities ◽  
Material Advantage ◽  
Corporate Criminal Liability ◽  
Limited Scope ◽  
Legal Entities

Abstract Cases, where operations of legal entities entail unfair income through the malpractice of improving financial reports, are quite frequent. Such behaviour is unacceptable and deserves a stern response from the state, not only against persons involved in illegal activities but also against particular legal entities resorting to such behaviour. The purpose of this article is to analyse the elements of corporate criminal liability in the legislation of Lithuania. The article investigates the fundamentals of corporate criminal liability with the major focus on the problems of distinction and applicability of relevant elements of the latter. The analysis emphasizes the assurance of the inevitability of corporate criminal liability. The article also discusses the method of criminalizing the liability of legal entities, chosen by the Lithuanian legislator, according to which criminal liability can arise only for a limited scope of criminal offences. Presumably, the current legal regulation enables an unreasonable avoidance of criminal liability in cases where the criminal offence falls outside the aforementioned limited scope, even though it was committed to gain a material advantage over the affected party. The article also addresses the guilt of legal entities. In this regard, the article criticizes the approach of the Supreme Court of Lithuania for its evident limitation of corporate criminal liability, especially in the context of large corporations owned by many shareholders. As a possible solution, it was proposed to lay criminal responsibility on corporate governance bodies instead of the shareholders.

scholarly journals PROBLEMS OF QUALIFICATION OF EXCITATION FOR HATEING OR ENMITY, AS ABA

2020 ◽  
pp. 35-40
Author(s):  
N.V. Tydykova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
The Internet ◽  
The Supreme Court

The author analyzes the practice of applying this corpus delicti and notes two trends. The first is tounjustifiably expand the range of acts for which criminal liability arises. This practice does not find support inthe theory of criminal law and causes outrage in society. To overcome this problem, the Supreme Court gaveexplanations, according to which, for the imputation of the composition under consideration, it is necessaryto establish a number of circumstances, in addition to the fact of placing an image or text on the Internet. Thesecond trend of law enforcement practice unites cases of a more thoughtful approach, when a whole complexof circumstances is taken into account to solve the issue of the composition of the composition. Examples aregiven when, prior to the relevant clarifications of the Supreme Court in law enforcement practice, ideas wereexpressed about the need to analyze all the circumstances of the deed, in particular, the targeted orientationof the placement of materials. This led to the conclusion that the Supreme Court did not formulate new rules,but pointed to an approach that is the only true one in the light of the principle of subjective imputation.The author argues that not every dissemination of material can be recognized as aimed at inciting hatred orenmity from someone, or humiliating dignity. It is necessary, with the help of a number of signs, to determinewhich particular idea the person broadcast.

scholarly journals Modern Problems of Establishing and Implementing Criminal Liability for Illegal Migration Crimes

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 341-351
Author(s):  
Vladimir Taranenko ◽  
Stanislav Kharitonov ◽  
Maria Reshnyak ◽  
Sergey Borisov
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Regulatory Compliance ◽  
Place Of Residence ◽  
Illegal Migration ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

This study aims to identify and consider modern problems in establishing and implementing criminal liability for crimes pertaining to illegal migration, such as illegal crossing of the Russian Federation State Border, organizing illegal migration, fictitious registration of citizens of the Russian Federation at a place of stay or place of residence in residential premises in the Russian Federation, fictitious migration registration of foreign citizens or stateless persons at a place of residence in residential premises in the Russian Federation, as well as fictitious registration of foreign citizens or stateless persons at a place of stay in the Russian Federation. On this basis, proposals to improve legislative and regulatory compliance practices in this area have been formulated. The object of research is social interaction associated with the establishment and application of criminal law provisions on accountability for the crimes. The subject of research is a complex of legislative, doctrinal and practical issues, the study of which contributes to the development of criminal law theory in the area of liability for illegal migration crimes. This article considers the clarifications issued by the Plenary Session of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation cited in resolution No. 18 “On Judicial Practice in Cases on Illegal Crossing of the State Border of the Russian Federation and on Crimes Pertaining to Illegal Migration” of July 9, 2020, relevant court practice materials and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation Judicial Department’s statistical data. Research methodology is based on general and specific scientific methods, including comparative legal and concrete-sociological ones. As a result of the comprehensive analysis of criminal justice vulnerabilities in response to crimes pertaining to illegal migration, proposals for further development of the criminal legislation on the fields of criminal liability for such crimes and practices associated with its application have been formulated. For example, this article reveals the content of actions that form the objective aspect of crimes pertaining to illegal migration, defines the legal and factual aspects of committed offences, and provides recommendations concerning their qualification, including differentiation between them and their separation from related crimes and similar administrative offenses.

scholarly journals The criminal liability of the medical team considering the recent orientation of the Italian Court of Cassation

2022 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 214-225
Author(s):  
Emanuela Furramani ◽  
Rrezart Bushati
Keyword(s):  
Medical Treatment ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Division Of Labour ◽  
Court Case ◽  
Medical Team ◽  
Supreme Court Case ◽  
Italian Constitution

This article aims to analyze the thematic of medical team liability considering the recent Italian Supreme Court case-law, highlighting the various problems linked to the identification of the responsibility of each member of the team. The participation of several subjects in the execution of medical treatment makes the question of criminal liability very complex, especially when it comes to inauspicious events, such as injuries or death, occurring during medical treatment. The question concerns the exact identification of the duty of care and vigilance of the medical team and whether this duty is in line with the principle of individual criminal responsibility guaranteed by Article 27 of the Italian Constitution. In this regard, the case-law has elaborated the so-called “principle of reasonable confidence”, according to which the division of labour that belongs to each member should involve a delimitation of his responsibility, limited only to what is within his competence, except in case of the person who organizes, directs, and controls the team. Precisely, based on this principle, the Italian Supreme Court in 2018 reasserted that in the medical team is necessary to identify the role played by each member, thus avoiding resorting to objective responsibility.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document