The main objective of the Constitutional Court is to protect rights and freedoms within its jurisdiction. The implementation of this objective is illustrated by the analysis how frequently the Court cited constitutional provisions concerning rights and freedoms in its decisions during the period of its work until 1 June 2020. The paper contains analysis of the data mentioned above. In a problematic way, the author demonstartes his approach to the understanding of the purpose of rights and freedoms in their relation to the duties of people. Theoretically, the intended purpose of rights and freedoms is to ensure the social freedom of people who are anxious for a fair social order, their full self-determination and the self-development of society. This implies that the Constitutional Court focuses not merely on the current protection of certain rights and freedoms, but on ensuring their priority in general in social and legal regulation, creating and maintaining a spirit of priority and overcoming the paternalistic order in the country. The priority of rights and freedoms extends not only to rights and freedoms expressly enshrined, but also to other people’s claims (legitimate interests, legitimate expectations). The latter are intended to guide implementation of other rights and freedoms, and, at the same time, to serve as the basis for the allocation of new rights. One of the manifestations of the priority of constitutional rights and freedoms is the direct application of rules that enshrine rights and freedoms by the Constitutional Court to the sectoral regulation, expanding the scope of rights and freedoms, particularly through the interpretation of constitutional concepts on the case-by-case basis. Particular attention is paid to the doctrinal views and approach of the Constitutional Court to the role of the category of human dignity in the systematic application of rights and freedoms. The paper has analysed how the Constitutional Court applies a well-known construction of a strong and weak entity in legal relations in its application to public power relations. Another aspect of the subject matter is the Court’s approach to securing the balance between different rights and freedoms.

The paper, based on the analysis of the legal nature of new digital objects of civil rights (digital rights, digital currency), makes conclusions concerning possible models of contractual relations arising from object’s data.

The author relies on the fact that in relation to the category “a digital right” an independent object can be recognized only in connection with the peculiarities of the form of the object (the form in which the property rights are fixed) rather than its content. Token is seen as a technical concept. i.e. a digital way of fixing property rights. The paper substantiates that the retributive disposal of the digital right (both as a utilitarian digital right and a digital financial asset), according to which the digital right acquirer in order to transfer the right in question undertakes to pay a certain amount of money, under the general rule, should be qualified as a contract for the sale of a digital right. At the same time, in each case this also refers to the transfers the subject matter of which covers the transfer of a separate property right as an object of civil rights (cashless money, a book-entry security, a law of obligation (claims)) classified by law as a digital right.

From the author’s point of view, digital currency in the system of objects of civil rights can be qualified only as “other property” in compliance with the the sui generis principle. It is concluded that transactions with digital currency should be classified as non-defined contracts. Contractual legal relations aimed at exchanging various objects for digital currency, in cases not contrary to the law, by analogy of the law, can be regulated under the rules applied to the contract of sale, the exclusive right alienation agreement or license agreement. Based on the special provisions of the law, a legally binding relationship regulating the digital currency, provided the tax authorities are not informed about such possession and transactions with such an object, has features of a natural obligation.

The paper analyzes the peculiarities of implementation of the regulatory function of family law agreements, identifies the factors influencing this process. The use of a functional approach in legal research is very traditional and justifiable because it allows to understand more about the meaning of a legal matter, to identify the essential characteristics (properties) of legal phenomena, as well as internal and external interrelations of the legal objects under consideration. The doctrine presents a functional analysis of agreements as a whole, provides scientific developments concerning certain contractual functions, as well as the functional characteristics of certain types and categories of agreements. However, a manifestation of a function may vary depending on the scope of application of the agreement, its legal nature, type, category and other parameters: some functions may be strongly expressed, and others demonstrate weaker manifistations. Such a balance shift in the system of functions of agreements acts as an expression of its direct instrumental nature.

The author concludes that the regulatory function is inherent in all family law agreements, the result of which is an individually-defined model of behavior of the parties, fixed by the terms of the family law agreements. The regulatory function manifistation in contracts depends on such interrelated factors as: 1) the balance between private and public components in certain contractual constructions in the are of family law (the greater the public nature in the contractual legal relationship, the stronger contractual freedom depends on regulatory prescriptions); (2) the degree of detail of the normative regulation of the contractal relationship, the existence of legal gaps or intentional non-interference of the legislator in the strictly personal private sphere of the family (the less detailed the relations between the parties to the family agreement are regulated by regulatory legal acts, the more manifested the regulatory function of family law agreement is).

International agreements, as well as the national legislation of various States, in addition to the territorial principle of protection of industrial property, the principle of national treatment, the principle of convention or exhibition priority, do not specifically identify other principles of protection of industrial property that would uniform national legislation in the field of protection of industrial property in most aspects of protection, and that would also take into account the specifics of a particular object of protection. The paper distinguishes and formulates general object principles of protection of industrial property, not expressly enshrined in international agreements, as well as special object principles of protection of individual objects of industrial property. It is noted that the operation of general principles applied universally for protection of all objects of industrial property and historically established universal principles of national regime, territoriality, principles of convention and exhibition priority are supplemented by such general object principles as the principle of exclusive protection of industrial property, the principle of production and technical development. These principles can be considered general in view of their extension to other objects not expressly specified in the Paris Convention. At the same time, with regard to separate objects (groups of objects) of industrial property, one can determine special object principles of protection on the ground of their specificity.

The author applies formal legal and comparative legal methods of the study, on the basis of which special international principles of protection were formulated: the principle of exclusive protection, the principle of focus on production and technical development. The paper describes special principles of protection for individual objects: the declarative and evidentiary principle of protection of registered industrial property, the principle of protection of marks “such as they are”, the principle of protection of new creative results in relation to patentable objects, the principle of absolute nature of the rights certified by the patent.

In the coming decade, the rapid development of the drone technology is to be expected. At the same time, airspace will increasingly become a conflict zone between drone operators and land users.

Unlike manned aircraft, drones are often used in low-altitude airspace, which is directly related to determining the “upper” boundary of the land plot as the object of use.

The author believes that the minimum altitude of the drone in airspace should ensure normal use of the land plot as intended. And the closer to the surface of the earth drones will fly, the more urgent there will be a need for a meaningful definition of such concepts as “the use of the land plot”, "impossibility of using the land plot”, “significant difficulties in using the land plot”, as well as criteria for “normal” use of the land plot as intended. According to the author, in some cases the specificity of activity on the surface of the earth necessitates the establishment of prohibitions (restrictions) on the use of unmanned aerial vehicles in air space above them, as well as special rules on the use of low altitude airspace to meet “their own needs” by persons using the relevant land plots.

Particular attention is paid to the issue of protection of the rights to privacy of persons using land plots. The author summarizes that the use of drones in combination with video technologies will make adjustments to the existing 2D view of the boundaries of the land plot as an object of use and will entail problems in the protection of the right mentioned above.

The paper analyzes various scientific approaches to understanding the effectiveness of criminal proceedings. It is concluded that in the doctrine of criminal process effectiveness is connected with the achievement of its purpose and tasks different understanding of which causes different understanding of effectiveness. On the basis of the analysis of the criminal procedure law, it is substantiated that the main criterion of evaluation of the effectiveness of criminal proceedings includes its influence on creation of favorable business environement in the country. The author recognizes the possibility of dividing the effectiveness of criminal proceedings into legal and social ones. The author interprets the legal effectiveness of the criminal process as its ability to ensure the public interest of all members of the society related to the full and comprehensive establishment of circumstances of the criminal case, the incrimination of the offender, the fight against crime. It is proposed to consider the possibility of criminal procedural means to secure normal economic relations and favorable business environement as one of the components of social effectiveness.

The paper proves that the means chosen to increase the social effectiveness associated with the implementation of economic rights and freedoms, negatively affect both itself and the legal effectiveness of the criminal process related to the implementation of its intended purpose. It is proposed to refuse to consider a favorable business environment as the main criterion for assessing the effectiveness of both the entire criminal process and its individual components. Effectiveness should come to the fore, and the criterion of such effectiveness includes public interests aimed at combating crime. It is concluded that even as a secondary component, favorable business environment as a criterion of effectiveness requires such legal means of ensuring it that would not reduce the guarantees of implementation of the highest public interest. It is substantiated that the creation of legal guarantees to protect business from criminal prosecution is unacceptable without creating a mechanism that can separate legal business from illegal business.

The paper highlights that in modern conditions the improvement of criminal proceedings is firmly connected with the introduction of digital technologies. As a result of this introduction, the usual criminal case on paper will gradually be replaced by an electronic criminal case. The use of such an electronic criminal case can result in many advantages, which are consistently described in the paper. The author notes that certain elements of the future electronic criminal case can already be found in the practical activities of investigative bodies and courts. The author comes to the conclusion that actual prerequisites to transfer materials of a conventional criminal case into digital form are being gradually developed. For a number of objective reasons, this process cannot be facilitated. But lack of facilitation is also unacceptable. The worldwide coronavirus pandemic has sharply raised the possibility of remote examination of criminal cases, reducing human contact to a possible minimum in the investigation of crimes. The possible solution to these problems can be seen in the maximum use of various digital technologies, including the creation of an electronic criminal case. It can be assumed that there will be some dualism in our legal proceedings over a certain transition period — along with a traditional paper criminal case, an electronic criminal case will be used gradually displacing the traditional case. The current task of the legislator is to develop both existing and emerging elements of the future electronic criminal case, determine their legal nature and requirements for their procedural form, develop the concept of the carrier of such a case.

Based on a critical analysis of the doctrinal definitions of the concept of "interest" in sociology, psychology, and law, it is concluded that the prevailing point of view in modern Russian legal theory, i.e. "interest is a conscious need to satisfy a need", is wrongly absolutized. Excessive psychologization of modern legal definitions of interest leads to a direct identification of interests with needs, puts an equal sign between these far from close concepts. It is shown that the widespread use of psychological terminology in legal definitions of interest (In particular, the terms "awareness" and "comprehension"), does not bring any "freshness" in legal knowledge about interests. The vast majority of phenomena, objects, and events in everyday and scientific speech are not considered to be conscious, since the awareness of these phenomena is self-evident. The doctrinal definitions of interests that exist in legal science and highlight their "awareness" as the main feature are practically unsuitable for law enforcement. The author substantiates the conclusion that the widely used legal concept of "interest" needs to be freed from the excessive psychologization of its many meanings, which will, in turn, free itself from the understanding of a conscious need as the only reason for the emergence of interest. It is suggested that the definition of "interest" should be formulated not on specific types or often synonymous meanings of this concept, but on generalizations of a higher order — such as could organically include all currently existing definitions of interest. Only universals can do this. And such a universal is the concept of "well-being".

The construction of the Russian legislation system is determined by the fundamental provisions on the types of normative legal acts, their relationship to each other, and the general issues of their creation, operation, accounting and systematization. These provisions are developed by the doctrine, they are constitutionally and legally fixed. New trends in the development of the foundations of the Russian legislation are announced by the amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation made in 2020. There were no significant changes in the system, structure, creation and operation of regulatory legal acts. At the same time, new terminology is being introduced, and new institutions that legal science should address are emerging. The concept of "public authority" is being introduced, and it is likely that the development of legal aspects of its activities should be taken into account in the concept of Russian legislation. Preliminary constitutional control of laws is another new institution. The Russian model is specific to the subject of the relevant request (the President of the Russian Federation) and the objects of preliminary constitutional control (draft laws, Federal laws and laws of the subjects of the Russian Federation). The paper discusses other new constitutional provisions related to the foundations of Russian legislation.

The author summarizes that in connection with the amendments-2020, the development of the constitutional and doctrinal foundations of the system of Russian legislation should also be noted. These grounds, without undergoing dramatic changes, become somewhat more complex, new institutions appear (preliminary constitutional control of laws adopted by Federal and regional parliaments, etc.) and new terminology (public power, etc.). The development of the doctrine is guided by political will and constitutional changes, which can be considered as legal means of consolidating public administration. Further doctrinal development of the adopted constitutional innovations and improvement of the concept of Russian legislation are also necessary.

The paper attempts to reflect the origin of a specific branch of scientific knowledge — the history of political and legal doctrines. The subject field of this science and discipline includes many problems, the main of which, no doubt, is the understanding of the phenomenon of law and the state, which are closely related to other institutions. Nevertheless, it is the state and law that ultimately determine their character. This is a kind of tradition laid down by Western legal science that was strongly influenced by pre-revolutionary jurisprudence. Russian lawyers, many of whom continued their studies at Western universities as part of the "preparation for professorship" procedure, mostly followed the approaches developed there. This concerned both ontological and epistemological aspects.

The author shows the difference between political and legal doctrines of the second half of the 19th century and the first half of the century. The 1860s reforms served as a kind of impetus for their development. In addition, in the second half of the 19th — early 20th century pre-revolutionary legal science moved to a new, fundamentally different scientific level of studying political and legal institutions.

There is another significant point. The problem is that, in fact, the historiography of this discipline and science has remained outside the framework of the history of political and legal doctrines. This paper is an attempt to fill this gap to some extent.

The author notes that the relevance of the history of political and legal doctrines arises during a period of intense political life, when stable social groups (strata, classes) with different political, social and legal ideals are formed. This situation developed in Russia in the early 20th century.

The prototype of the modern institution of limitation periods for criminal prosecution appears in old Russian law. The crime under it is of a private legal nature (offense), and the main punishment is revenge on the offender. The nascent state power requires limiting revenge, which is destructive in nature, although it continues to act as a natural reaction to deviant behavior. One of these restrictions is the establishment of a certain period during which it was allowed to take revenge with impunity. In different legal systems, this period is designated differently. In old Russian law, which was influenced by Byzantine legal practice, there was a demand for the legality of revenge only in case of immediate implementation, which brings it closer to the institution of necessary defense. This also shows the beginnings of the modern institution of limitation periods, since revenge at that time satisfied the goals of punishment. The analysis of the norms of Russkaya Pravda [Russian Justice] in comparison with the norms of ancient German law is a confirmation of this. In addition, the establishment of limitation periods in old Russian law in some cases had procedural prerequisites, which are also characteristic of the modern institution of limitation periods. Nevertheless, long-standing oblivion did not receive its further development in old Russian law. The most popular institution was monetary compensation, which not only effectively replaced revenge, but also provided an economic platform for the emerging state apparatus. In such circumstances, it was economically unprofitable to limit the payment of ransom as the main type of punishment for that period of time, and first of all directly to the state in the person of the princely power. Thus, in its historical development, the institution of limitation periods for criminal prosecution at the stage of old Russian law acquires its identity and significance only when comparing and disclosing those tasks that were solved by the state in this particular period of time by applying punishment.

The paper describes the history, realities and prospects of development of specialized juvenile courts in the Republic of Kazakhstan. The relevance of the topic is related to the ongoing judicial and legal reforms in the Republic of Kazakhstan that are aimed at developing the specialization of courts and judges. Specialization of courts and judges as a vector of development of the judicial system and improvement of judicial proceedings is particularly relevant in the context of global competitiveness. Based on the study of the prerequisites that led to the need to create specialized courts, the current state of juvenile courts of the Republic of Kazakhstan is evaluated and trends in its further development are predicted, which constitute the theoretical and practical significance of the research topic. The study showed a significant role of juvenile courts in improving the sociodemographic characteristics of the population. Based on the results of the study, brief conclusions were made confirming the relevance of the chosen topic, and at the same time the demand and justification of specialized juvenile courts of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The methodological basis of the research consists of historicallegal and comparative-legal methods of cognition of objective reality, as well as methods of legal statistics and forecasting. The works of famous Kazakh scientists became the theoretical basis of the research. The first decrees of the President of Kazakhstan, constitutional, statutory and legislative acts of Kazakhstan, as well as strategic, conceptual and program documents on development of Kazakhstan compose the normative basis of the research. The empirical basis of the study is regional statistical data on the work of specialized juvenile courts. The data of a sociological survey among persons who participated in trials that took place in 16 specialized juvenile courts are studied. Analytical reports, as well as information reviews on the activities of specialized juvenile courts and the state of their administration of justice are considered. The author researched the results of the implementation of pilot projects called "Judicial Mediation"; "Juvenile Justice"; "Reconciliation: Before and in Court"; "Family Court". The paper presents the experience of establishing family courts in the countries of America, Japan, and the Canadian province of Nova Scotia.

The paper analyzes the objective and subjective features of article 151.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The problems of interpretation and application of this norm are investigated, taking into account the goals and objectives underlying its creation. Special legislation regulating the sphere under study is considered. The studied imperfections of regulation of the subject of the crime (the relationship between the concepts of alcoholic and alcohol-containing products), problems of distinguishing acts from related compounds (article 151 of the Criminal Code), the complexity of the classification. The analysis of crime-forming features is presented: "repeatability", "retail", and "sale". Imperfections of the legislative and law enforcement approach in this aspect are revealed. In particular, the key features and correlation of the concepts of wholesale and retail trade are analyzed; the problems of assessing what was done with remote methods of selling alcohol; the content aspects of the categories "duplicity and repetition" in the context under study. The question of the expediency of replacing the term "sale" with "illegal sale" in the disposition of article 151.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is studied. The regulation of features of the subject of the studied elements is considered, and existing problems are identified. The question of the expediency of norms with administrative prejudice in the criminal law was raised. Some problematic aspects of sentencing for retail sale of alcoholic products to minors are identified; and issues of establishing the subjective side of the elements. The paper analyzes the opinions of various authors regarding the possibility of improving the norm of article 151.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, taking into account the study of statistical data and materials of judicial practice. The author indicates the need for an integrated approach in the fight against alcohol abuse among young people. The conclusion is presented regarding the validity of the existence of the studied norm in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in the current version.

The paper is devoted to a detailed analysis of article 210.1 "Occupation of the highest position in the criminal hierarchy", which was introduced in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation by Federal law No. 46-FZ of 01.04.2019. The authors considered the construction of this norm from the point of view of the elements of the crime and the coordination of these features with the provisions of the General part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. As a result of a systematic study of the norms of the Russian criminal law, comparison with foreign experience (Georgia), and analysis of law enforcement practice, the discrepancy between the new criminal law norm and the provisions of certain institutions of criminal law was revealed. In particular, the content of article 210.1 contradicts certain principles of the criminal law (articles 6, 7 of the Criminal Code), the basis of criminal liability (article 8 of the Criminal Code), the norms of the Institute of preparation for a crime (part 1 of article 30 of the Criminal Code), as well as the goals of criminal punishment (part 2 of article 43 of the Criminal Code). To eliminate the identified shortcomings, the authors propose to include in the disposition of article 210.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation an act in the form of using the highest position in the criminal hierarchy. The proposed changes (including an act in the form of "use of the position») make it possible to prosecute persons both permanently and temporarily performing the functions of such persons, to leave outside the scope of its application persons who fully walked away from crime and not in any way affect criminal damage. They will allow you to bring the rule into compliance with the traditional understanding of the offense and those provisions of the General part of the Criminal Code, in which the regulated norms in the current edition are not made consistent.