- PII
- S013207690002203-5-1
- DOI
- 10.31857/S013207690002203-5
- Publication type
- Article
- Status
- Published
- Authors
- Volume/ Edition
- Volume / Issue 12
- Pages
- 93-103
- Abstract
This scientific article is devoted to the study of the actual problems of legal terminology, proceeding from the trend of the interbranch transgression of legislative terms and definitions in the modern legal field. The transgression is considered by the authors as a process of bridging the boundaries between terminology systems of law branch by "exporting" legal terms and definitions from one law branch to other branches and institutions of law. This phenomenon is considered in its various aspects, including prejudicial, and also in the context of problems of observing the principle of law’s branch autonomy, which is great importance in this process. For versatility and completeness of the research, the authors analyzed various doctrinal approaches in domestic and foreign science on this subject, and also considered the problems of law enforcement practice on the example of transgression and autonomy of various branches of public and private law.
- Keywords
- transgression of law terms, terminology system, definition, law’s branch autonomy, interbranch relations, “donor-branch of law”, ”recipient-branch of law”, prejudice
- Date of publication
- 22.12.2018
- Number of purchasers
- 12
- Views
- 2916
References
- 1. Mamedov E.F. Pravovye terminy, definitivnye normy i ehffektivnost' pravovogo regulirovaniya // Vestnik Nizhegorodsk. akademii MVD Rossii. 2011. № 3 (16). S. 299.
- 2. Novejshij filosofskij slovar'. 3-e izd., ispr. Minsk, 2003. S. 1048.
- 3. Fesenko L.A., Rygalov V.V. Problemy vzaimodejstviya kul'tury i politiki v usloviyakh transgressivnogo razvitiya // Vestnik YuUrGU. Ser. “Sotsial'nogumanitarnye nauki”. T. 13. 2013. № 1. S. 139.
- 4. Gadzhiev G.A. Ontologiya prava (Kriticheskoe issledovanie yuridicheskogo kontsepta dejstvitel'nosti). M., 2016. S. 208.
- 5. Alekseev S.S. Teoriya prava. M., 1995. S. 192.
- 6. Kerimov D.A. Metodologiya prava. 2-e izd. M., 2001. S. 267.
- 7. Mikheenkova M.A. Printsip avtonomii ugolovnogo prava i protsessa v klassicheskoj kontinental'noj doktrine // Zakon. 2013. № 8. S. 75.
- 8. Magomedov S.K. Unifikatsiya normativnoj pravovoj terminologii i edinoe pravovoe prostranstvo // Zhurnal ross. prava. 2004. № 3. S. 24, 26.
- 9. Berzhel' Zh.-L. Obschaya teoriya prava / pod obsch. red. V.I. Danilenko / per. s fr. M., 2000. S. 354.
- 10. Cherdantsev A.F. Tolkovanie prava i dogovora: ucheb. posobie dlya vuzov. M., 2003. S. 168.
- 11. Dukhovskij M.V. Russkij ugolovnyj protsess. M., 1910. S. 175, 176.
- 12. Gubaeva T.V. Yazyk i pravo. Iskusstvo vladeniya slovom v professional'noj yuridicheskoj deyatel'nosti. M., 2003. S. 133.
- 13. Polyakov A.V., Timoshina E.V. Obschaya teoriya prava: ucheb. SPb., 2005. S. 422.
- 14. Leonenko N.G. Zakonodatel'naya tekhnika: ucheb. posobie. Novosibirsk, 2015. S. 105.
- 15. Gambaryan A., Pogosyan T. Uskorennoe sudebnoe proizvodstvo v ugolovnom protsesse RA. Erevan, 2008. S. 29 (na armyan. yaz.).
- 16. Chukhvichev V.D. Zakonodatel'naya tekhnika: ucheb. posobie. Ashkhabad, 2011. S. 52.
- 17. Dudyrin D.S. Trebovaniya k pravovoj definitsii [Ehlektronnyj resurs] – Rezhim dostupa. URL: http://journal.mrsu.ru/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/dudyrind.pdf (data obrascheniya: 16.09.2017).
- 18. Kostrova M.B. Definirovanie ponyatij i terminov, ispol'zuemykh v UK RF // Zhurnal ross. prava. 2003. № 12. S. 88.
- 19. Kononov I.S. Avtonomnye ponyatiya Evropejskogo Suda i ikh znachenie dlya ugolovnogo prava Rossii // Sovremennaya nauka: aktual'nye problemy teorii i praktiki. Ser. “Ehkonomika i pravo”. 2012. № 3. S. 82.
- 20. Gadzhiev G.A. Ontologiya prava (Kriticheskoe issledovanie yuridicheskogo kontsepta dejstvitel'nosti). M., 2016. S. 207, 208.
- 21. Lupinskaya P.A. Osnovaniya i poryadok resheniya voprosov o nedopustimosti dokazatel'stv pri rassmotrenii del sudom prisyazhnykh: nauch.-prakt. posobie. Varshava, 1998. S. 115, 116.
- 22. Savitskij V.M., Larin A.M. Ugolovnyj protsess. Slovar'-spravochnik. M., 1999. S. 156.
