Drawing upon the methodology of scientific inquiry and the foundational tenets of civil law theory, the author explores the legal consequences of digital transformation in the sphere of civil law relationships. The analysis leads to the conclusion that a variety of digital phenomena — including digital rights, the digital ruble, digital currency, cryptocurrency, digital financial assets, artificial intelligence, and associated technologies-constitute, by their essential nature, ideal-type innovative products. Through the use of computer processor-based machine language that represents a materially grounded system of signs these intangible constructs acquire an objective digital embodiment, thereby attaining the status of objects of civil law relationships. Based upon the proposed classification of digital objects, the author examines typological characteristics and distinctions of such objects in legal regulation. The study further identifies emerging trends in the evolution of property turnover,
particularly in relation to the multiplier effect of digital objects under conditions of systemic transformation. The author addresses the legal consequences arising from alterations in the objective form and the interchangeability of the material carriers of new digital objects. The author argues that the theoretical and practical challenges associated with the transformation of the nexus between the content, form, and material substrate of digital objects underscore the necessity for the development and legislative codification of legal constructs capable not only of remedying existing lacunae and complexities in the regulation of relations involving innovative digital products, but also of establishing effective mechanisms for the legal protection of such objects and the enforcement of subjective rights in relation thereto.

   The study emphasizes the influence of judicial determinations on the evolution of doctrinal interpretation and the development of enforcement practice concerning a number of post-reform provisions governing pledge and lien. Particular attention is given to the judicial recognition of an expanded scope of pledge rights, encompassing revenues generated from the use of the encumbered property, insurance compensation, and other instances of «transformation» of the pledged asset (a collateral). The analysis underscores the restraining construction adopted by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, whereby the scope of the pledgee’s right is fixed at the moment of its creation and does not automatically extend to subsequently acquired assets or proceeds. Furthermore, the paper examines the approaches, unified in 2025, to construing the contested legal concept of a pledge arising by virtue of attachment. This examination is undertaken with due regard to the Supreme Court’s consistent refusal to accord the respective creditors priority in insolvency proceedings, including in cases involving tax-related attachments. With regard to the consequences of a pledge established by an unauthorized party, the author draws attention to the mitigation of adverse effects for the owner, who, in such circumstances, does not assume any additional contractual obligations. The standing of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on this matter is noted to be subject to scholarly debate: the expiration of the limitation period for a claim to recover a debt entitles the pledgor to demand the removal of the pledge record, and this approach is likewise extended to situations involving the lapse of the time limit for presenting an order of execution for compulsory enforcement. The analysis further specifies the legal implications of an onerous acquisition of pledged property by a purchaser who was unaware of the encumbrance, with particular reference to the interruption of the chain of transfers at the good-faith acquirer. In relation to the right of retention, the author systematizes the conditions for its lawful application as follows: legitimate possession of the item; a direct connection between the creditor’s claim and the retained item; and the inadmissibility of unlawful possession. It is emphasized that retention cannot be indefinite: once the debtor loses interest in the item, the lienor is obliged to initiate enforcement within a reasonable period.

   This study employs historical-legal, comparative-historical, and formal-legal analysis to investigate the formation of the foundations of modern Russian labor law during the post-Petrine period (1725–1785). Although separated in time from the present, this era was pivotal in establishing early institutions, legal constructs, and regulatory approaches governing hired subordinate labor. 18^th-century labor legislation introduced notable methodological innovations, foremost among them the positivization of legal norms, whereby prescriptive rules acquired binding statutory form. A parallel development was the entrenchment of public-law principles in the regulation of labor relations. Pre-Petrine statehood largely refrained from intervening in the contractual relationship between an employer and an employee, maintaining a civil-law model of consensual hiring. In contrast, the post-Petrine legal landscape began to embody the defining characteristic of contemporary Russian labor law — a synthesis of private- and public-law principles. Key legal institutions codified in this period foreshadowed present-day labor protections, including guarantees for wages, limits on working hours, safety standards, prohibitions on arbitrary punishment, rules on wage deductions, formalized workplace discipline, and the recognition of localized norm-setting authority. The analysis reveals structural continuities between the 18^th century and the present, particularly in enduring regulatory weaknesses: ineffective enforcement of enacted norms, inadequate labor-law awareness among the workforce, and deficient mechanisms of oversight and compliance control.

   The decriminalization of petty theft involving private property appears unjustified within the framework of contemporary criminal policy. While the decriminalization of minor theft of socialist property in the USSR was arguably warranted — given the disproportionately severe penalties historically imposed for such offenses — the same rationale does not extend to present-day conditions. Widespread petty embezzlement inflicts tangible harm on the economy, fosters public corruption, and exacerbates adverse criminogenic conditions, thereby facilitating the integration of youth into criminal subcultures. The absence of provisions addressing complicity and attempted theft in the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation significantly undermines the effectiveness of legal measures against theft. In determining sanctions for theft, it is advisable to consider the repeated commission of such offenses by individuals with prior theft-related convictions. Reform of the legal framework governing exemption from criminal liability is also warranted, with a view toward generally excluding the possibility of exemption for individuals previously relieved from liability for acquisitive crimes. Given its inherent nature as an act mala in se, theft cannot reasonably be reclassified as a mere violation of public order or an administrative infraction. Individuals accused of theft should be afforded the procedural guarantees characteristic of criminal proceedings. Comparative legal analysis demonstrates that, in the criminal law of economically developed continental European jurisdictions and in England, the monetary value of the stolen property is not a decisive factor in establishing criminal liability. In the United States, consistent with the principles of the historical English common law, both petty and grand theft are subject to criminal prosecution. Notably, in several former Soviet republics, a legislative trend has emerged toward reinstating criminal liability for petty embezzlement.

   The revocation of suspended sentences and conditional forms of release from punishment, as prescribed by criminal legislation in cases of unlawful conduct during the probationary period, functions as a mechanism for differentiating the intensity of supervision over convicted individuals. Nevertheless, the commission of administrative offences during this period does not invariably constitute a sufficient basis for modifying the measures of social control. In a number of provisions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the legislative language does not facilitate a proper assessment or timely response to such offences, remaining narrowly focused on breaches of public order. Empirical analysis of law enforcement practices regarding the supervision of offenders serving suspended sentences, as well as those conditionally released from punishment, reveals structural limitations within supervisory authorities that hinder prompt responses to certain forms of unlawful behavior. The introduction of clearly defined and differentiated statutory grounds for the termination of conditional criminal law measures would significantly enhance the effectiveness and precision of criminal justice policy. Considering the individual circumstances of offenders, the study advocates for the implementation of a nuanced framework that systematically classifies both administrative and criminal offences in accordance with the degree of their severity. Such an approach would serve as an indicator of an offender’s failure to rehabilitate and the persistence of their social danger, thereby enabling more accurate and proportionate legal interventions.

   This paper offers a historical analysis of the evolution of legal protections for information concerning the private lives of citizens in Russian criminal proceedings. The study demonstrates that, throughout its legal history, Russia has attached particular importance to safeguarding certain categories of private, personal, and family-related information, with special emphasis on the realm of criminal justice — where individual rights are most acutely at stake. Examination of legislative developments across different historical periods shows that lawmakers have consistently sought to limit the dissemination of such information. The findings suggest that the norms restricting access to private life data have undergone a long and complex evolution, shaped by shifts in political regimes. These shifts determined both the initially narrow scope and the subsequent expansion of citizens’ rights to privacy protection.

   The paper examines the specific features of applying artificial intelligence technologies in the healthcare system, including issues of physicians’ personal liability when making diagnostic and treatment decisions based on an algorithm’s recommendation (decision). The study provides a review of the current legal framework governing the liability of healthcare professionals and assesses possible options for allocating liability arising from the integration of artificial intelligence into physicians’ work. The author examines possible directions for legislative improvement and identifies the particular challenges that medical organizations, healthcare professionals and patients receiving care with intelligent systems may face. Trends in the allocation of liability for harm caused in the provision of medical care are analyzed, enabling the development of potential models for distributing responsibility between medical institutions and individual practitioners in the future.

   The category of «identity» has migrated into the conceptual framework of jurisprudence, including constitutional law from other social sciences and humanities. In this regard, the main part of the paper consistently explores the facets of the phenomenon of identity within the framework of four blocks: 1) in socio-anthropological and 2) national-political aspects, 3) considers identity as a phenomenon of legal reality through a synonymous series («legal style», «legal culture», «legal memory»), 4) explores the doctrine of constitutional identity as a kind of meta-level of ontological and institutional (positivized) existence of identity in law. The multidimensional semantic dichotomy of identity in legal studies is noted: as a state of uniqueness (distinct identity) and sameness (community); as a result of subjective self-determination (reflexive irrational act) and a catalog of objectivist parameters of state political, regulatory and legal systems; as a product of the synergy of classical positivism, universal legal values and national legal culture. According to the author, in the logic of interference and diffraction of multiple meanings, constitutional identity, on the one hand, is found in a kind of normative «core» of system-forming constitutional values, the definition of which is proposed in the paper. On the other hand, it can be presented as the quintessence of legal and extralegal factors that determine the national constitutional order in a particular historical period. The doctrine of constitutional identity thus integrates several interpenetrating levels: axiological, national, and normative.

   The presented work, to a certain extent, continues the paper titled «Ethno-regional independence and autonomy as ways to exercise the right to self-determination» published in Lex Russica journal (Kagramanov AK. Ethno-regional independence and autonomy as ways to exercise the right to self-determination. Lex russica. 2022;75(2):9-23. Available at: URL: https://doi.org/10.17803/1729-5920.2022.183.2.009-023. (In Russ.)). The paper was devoted to the implementation of the right to self-determination as in the case of the Russian Federation and other federal states. In this paper, the author attempts to reveal the specifics of the right to self-determination implementation and conflict resolution in plural unitary states and «divided societies» complicated by ethnic, linguistic, religious, and other elements. The author examines the main legal doctrines, regulatory framework and practical positive and negative examples (Austria, Italy, Ukraine, Iraq, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Northern Ireland, Philippines, etc.) of the implementation of various models of self-government, such as integrationism, consociationalism, power-sharing, «complex separation of powers», electoral law, inclusivity, human and minority rights, vertical and horizontal ways of delegating powers, etc., contributing to the combination of the territorial integrity of the state and the implementation of the right to self-determination. Neglect of these institutional methods, as the author believes, can lead to secession of territories. In conclusion, the author argues that the most suitable model under the current conditions of development for plural states is moderate consociationalism.

   The paper is devoted to the study of issues related to the regulatory legal framework governing unfriendly and hostile actions by foreign states as grounds for activating measures of administrative and legal protection of state sovereignty. These actions, while synonymous from the standpoint of the Russian language, differ significantly in their factual and legal content and require distinct legal regulation. Hostile actions, unlike unfriendly ones, are extremely aggressive and unlawful, and consequently, necessitate stricter response measures, as well as a special procedure for their imposition and termination. For this purpose, it seems most appropriate to introduce targeted amendments to the Federal Law «On Measures to Influence (Counteract) the Unfriendly Actions of the United States of America and Other Foreign States». A detailed study of the legal foundations of unfriendly actions has led to the following conclusions: the legal grounds for responding to unfriendly actions are not specified and are scattered across a large number of regulatory legal acts of various hierarchies; the procedures for imposing different protective measures against unfriendly actions vary; there is no unified approach to the timelines for imposing and enforcing measures to protect Russia’s sovereignty from unfriendly actions; often, the imposed measures for sovereignty protection are not properly justified, which creates problems in law enforcement, including in safeguarding the rights and freedoms of individuals and organizations. Having analyzed a significant number of acts, the author concludes that it is necessary to clarify the criteria for classifying actions of foreign states as unfriendly and to adjust the procedural issues related to imposing measures to protect state sovereignty from such actions.

   By including a denunciation clause in a treaty, its participants thereby create a non-confrontational path for a potential future withdrawal from that treaty. The study of treaty practice shows that the conditions for denunciation are highly diverse and can be tailored by the parties depending on the subject matter of the treaty itself. Guided by the relevant provision of the treaty, each participant has the right to refuse further fulfillment of its obligations; however, such refusal must be made in strict accordance with the procedural conditions determined by the parties directly within the treaty. While providing treaty participants with the right to denounce it, states may simultaneously include special conditions in the treaty that guarantee the achievement of the treaty’s objectives, even if one of the parties decides to exercise the right to denounce it. The study of treaty practice indicates that such conditions are usually included in treaties governing cooperation between the parties in a critically important area (e. g., the construction of energy facilities). At the same time, the author finds the inclusion of denunciation clauses in arms limitation treaties inadvisable, as the operation of such treaties, which serve to strengthen the collective security system, should not depend on the current state of relations between states. As the research has shown, denunciation clauses included in these treaties can become a kind of «loophole», allowing a state to virtually arbitrarily withdraw from the treaty at any moment if its relations with another party deteriorate at some stage. The denunciation of such treaties is a destructive factor for the collective security system. The termination of such treaties should occur only as a result of a compromise reached by all its parties.

   The paper analyzes organizational and legal aspects, financial and property issues, and contractual elements of a model mechanism for interaction within a non-legal entity, non-corporate association of scientific and educational organizations, industrial partners, and other entities using the infrastructure of interuniversity campuses. A number of key factors are identified that are proposed to be taken into account when developing a common organizational and legal model for the functioning of an interuniversity campus. The organizational component of campus management is characterized as a regionally oriented, project-based model with predominant state participation, elements of concession management, and management based on a consortium agreement (or other contractual structure). Non-governmental entities of university campuses are classified based on the type of activity performed and functional role. It is noted that the creation of a network of regional campuses significantly changes the role of universities in the socio-economic development of regions, and the purpose of the infrastructure of the interuniversity campus is strongly linked to the public functions and purposes of its use. It is emphasized that the success of the project depends on the adaptation of universities to new conditions, constructive relations with regional public authorities and business, as well as a balance between federal and regional needs. The proposed campus management model combines the active role of regional public authorities, an ecosystem of technological entrepreneurship, networking and digital transformation. Particular attention is given to the need for clear definition of the roles and responsibilities of participants, as well as consideration of regional specifics. The need to amend the legislation for the effective implementation of the project is emphasized.

   The metaverse is an evolutionary form of digital society characterized by the development of social attributes and the integration of virtual and real worlds. It functions as a complex virtual social system based on a real social structure and covering various spheres of life such as politics, economics and culture. The social and transactional behavior of people in a virtual environment is gradually having the opposite effect on real life, forming new models of interaction and communication. Augmented reality technology allows you to display virtual objects based on the real world, which enhances the feeling of immersion and emphasizes the need for a harmonious combination of virtual and real spaces. As a new direction in the development of cyberspace, the metaverse has a decentralized logical architecture and ensures the integration of virtual and real worlds. However, this integration gives rise to new criminal risks, affecting the legal protection of civil rights, property and intellectual property rights, as well as digital financial systems and regulatory mechanisms. Crimes in the virtual space continue to transform, demonstrating new forms of behavior and self-expression. Based on a detailed analysis of the concept, characteristics, and social aspects of the metaverse, as well as patterns of wrongdoing in this space, strategies for minimizing criminal risks are proposed. In particular, effective counteraction to crimes in the metaverse requires the creation of a multi-subject supervisory system based on artificial intelligence and blockchain technologies. This system should use data and platforms as key regulatory elements to ensure the safety and protection of users’ rights.