No 3 (2026)

Аt the moment there is no single codified legal act in Russia that would be aimed at regulating the basic provisions and principles of incentives. In this regard, the need to create such a regulatory legal act is obvious. It should be emphasized that the specified normative legal act should fix these issues at the federal and regional levels, as well as relate to administrative law.

The main task is to study the features and structure of administrative and legal norms on encouragement.

Analysis, synthesis, generalization, comparative legal and formal logical methods. The methods used made it possible to substantiate the arguments given, on the basis of which scientifically based conclusions were made about the need to improve the system of administrative and legal norms on encouragement.

The article analyzes the features of the structure of administrative and legal norms on encouragement. The peculiarities of the implementation of administrative and legal norms on encouragement are revealed. Based on the analysis, it is concluded that a distinctive feature of the incentive norm is its binomial structure. Based on the results of the analysis, a conclusion has been formulated on the need to create a single codified federal law that will consolidate the basic principles and provisions of incentives at the federal and regional levels. The necessity of allocating incentive norms as an independent type of legal norms is also justified.

The article discusses the technological transformation of the work of court staff under the influence of the introduction of new software products and the formation of a unified environment for the functioning of government agencies, and therefore examines the issue of necessary changes in the personnel training of employees related to the process of judicial system informatization. The authors consider the emerging practical problems of effective judicial informatization and point out the importance of developing professional competencies related to information protection. A number of significant issues are highlighted that are important in the organization of training and the preparation of educational programs. The proposed recommendations are aimed at improving the personnel training of court staff, including through the institute of mentoring.

The Russian legislation does not disclose the concept of “architectural work”. At the same time, each type of work protected as an object of copyright has its own special characteristics, including with regard to the form of its expression. Architectural works also have their own characteristics. The Civil Code of the Russian Federation indicates that architectural works can be expressed, including in the form of projects, drawings, images and layouts. Due to the discussion about the forms of expression of architectural works, in the process of using design documentation and implementing architectural projects, disputes arise about the availability and ownership of rights to design documentation and objects created on its basis.

The article presents the results of an analysis of legislation in the field of intellectual property, architectural activity and law enforcement practice of courts. According to the results of the analysis of judicial practice, it is noted that the results of construction and reconstruction, as well as the documentation in which they are reflected, in the absence of the realization of a creative idea in them (for example, linear objects, cannot relate to works of architecture.

The article is dedicated to the interpretation of transactions. Its purpose is to provide a scholarly analysis of Russian and foreign legislation, legal theory, and law enforcement practice concerning the interpretation of civil transactions. The article’s objectives are: to examine the interpretation of contracts, inheritance agreements, and wills, and to address problems in their legal application.

Research methods: analysis, formal legal, comparative legal.

The article explores the legal framework governing the interpretation of contracts and wills within domestic and foreign legal systems, doctrinal positions, and relevant judicial practice. The study’s findings reveal both commonalities and divergences in the legal norms regulating the interpretation of contracts and wills in Russia, Belarus, Germany, Spain, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and a number of other countries. The author identifies the principal distinctions within Russian legislation on the interpretation of contracts versus wills, which lie in the subjects entitled to interpret them and the methods of interpretation employed. Consequently, the study concludes by proposing specific amendments to the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Based on this research, the author concludes that it is advisable to introduce into the Civil Code of the Russian Federation a specific article on the interpretation of unilateral transactions, as well as Art. 1140.2, “Interpretation of an Inheritance Agreement”, which accounts for the dual legal nature of this type of contract. Furthermore, it is proposed to supplement Art. 1132 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation with a clause stating that if the literal meaning of a testamentary provision cannot be determined using the rules established in the first and second parts of this article, that provision shall be deemed non-existent. Finally, the author concludes that further research is needed on the interpretation of civil law transactions, as well as the improvement of legislation and its application in practice.

The legal binding force of an international commercial arbitration award does not imply its automatic enforceability beyond the jurisdiction where it was rendered. In order for such an award to be applied within the territory of the Russian Federation, it must be recognized and enforced in accordance with international treaties and domestic legislation. This issue becomes particularly acute in the context of interaction with Chinese arbitral institutions, given the increasing volume of trade between Russia and the People’s Republic of China and the growing number of cross-border disputes.

The purpose of this study is to identify the key issues and factors affecting the successful recognition of Chinese arbitral awards within Russian jurisdiction. The research tasks include analyzing provisions of international agreements, bilateral treaties between Russia and China, relevant national legal norms, and examining judicial practice, including cases involving CIETAC and HKIAC, which have revealed recurring evidentiary and procedural challenges.

The methodology is based on a comparative legal analysis of international and domestic regulatory sources, as well as the interpretation of legal norms and judicial decisions. This approach places particular emphasis on identifying difficulties in the application of law, including the interpretation of arbitration clauses, inconsistencies in translations, violations of public policy norms, and uncertainties concerning jurisdiction in complex contractual arrangements. Such a methodology enables the systematic identification of prevailing trends in judicial practice, common procedural errors by the parties, and the factors leading to refusal in the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards.

The study concludes with the need for more precise drafting of arbitration clauses, adherence to translation requirements, and strengthening mutual confidence in arbitral institutions. It underscores the importance of procedural harmonization and the observance of good faith and legal certainty as essential conditions for the stable recognition of Chinese arbitral decisions in Russia.

State funding of criminal justice occurs in two forms. The first type of expenditure is aimed at creating and maintaining the infrastructure of state bodies conducting criminal proceedings and participating in these activities. These state expenditures are institutional in nature and can be defined as judicial. The other type of state expenditure is related to the implementation of specific investigative and procedural actions by reimbursing the costs of their participants and paying them compensation. These are called legal or procedural costs. The distinction between them is important for both the legislative process and academic research.

A recent study aimed to justify the reclassification of certain expenses traditionally associated with the administration of justice as procedural costs. However, the use of general scientific methods for analyzing law enforcement practices and statistics, as well as research into the legal framework for criminal proceedings and related areas, allowed us to obtain data on actual trends in the changing structure of public spending on criminal proceedings.

The impact of a number of regulatory, institutional, and functional factors on reducing procedural costs was identified and analyzed. These factors include: the development of videoconferencing for remote participation in criminal proceedings, a reduction in the use of witnesses in certain investigative actions, the development of a system of state forensic institutions and an increase in the number of examinations conducted there, the establishment of enhanced guarantees for certain categories of employees in the event of their removal from office, and others. Furthermore, the reduction of these procedural costs should obviously be accompanied by increased spending on the relevant state apparatus and its expenditures.

A real trend in the changing structure of public expenditure on criminal proceedings is the transition of some funds previously spent as procedural costs to the category of legal costs, which requires the attention of legislators and procedural scholars.