The paper analyzes the so-called institutional theory of the state and law, a significant role in the development of which was played by the French jurist and philosopher of law M. Hauriou. Legal institutionalism as a trend in a legal science is as fundamental as normativism or sociologism. C. Schmitt, who paid great attention to M. Hauriou’s research on public law problems, defined the direction of his French contemporary’s thought as a third way between normative and decisionist solutions to scientific and legal problems: if a normativist thinks with impersonal norms, then a decisionist sees only a personal solution that implements the law of a properly understood political situation. Thus, institutional legal thinking is deployed in structural supra-personal institutions and forms.

The main provisions of the institutional theory were used in the further development of European jurisprudence. Institutions are considered as corporate, organic and instrumental formations that consolidate and fix the processes of legal formation. In this case, the state itself acquires the qualities of an institution. The problem of institutionalization is inextricably linked with the problems of state sovereignty, forms of implementation of political power, and the construction of legal systems. M. Hauriou argues with various subjectivist concepts of the state and law, insisting on the priority of an objectivist approach to the problem of state power. His approach was supported by a number of prominent jurists, whose views are considered in this paper in comparison with the basic postulates of the theory of M. Hauriou. It was this scholar, along with another outstanding jurist L. Duguit, who formed the origins of the theory of the so-called sociolaw that has become so relevant in our time.

Individuality and personal qualities manifistation is characteristic not only for authors when they create works, but also for performers. Performing a work, a performer leaves an imprint of his understanding of this work. Such an individual contribution gives grounds for the recognition of performers’ personal non-property rights to their performance. The personal non-property rights of the performer not only indicate the connection 

between the performer and the result of intellectual activity (performance) created by him, but they also allow the performer to terminate the actions of third parties affecting the personal interests of the performer.

The paper provides a comparative analysis of the provisions of Russian and foreign legislative acts in the field of intellectual property concerning the personal non-property rights of performers. It is pointed out that the approaches applied to the protection of personal non-property rights of performers in the states of the Romano-German and Anglo-American legal systems have some differences. Thus, in the USA, provisions on unfair competition, privacy, etc. are applied to protect the non-property rights of performers. In Russia, when creating the provisions of legislation concerning the personal non-property rights of the performer, the provisions on similar rights of the author are taken as a basis, but in comparison with the authors, the rights of performers are more limited in scope. The author examines some problematic aspects indicating the expediency of studying the possibility of expanding the scope of the rights granted to the performer. In addition, it seems that the performer could have personal non-property rights that are not related to intellectual rights, for example, the right to an individual appearance and the right to vote.

The problem of family agreements is not new to Russian jurisprudence, but it has not lost its relevance for many years. Attention to the issue is shown by representatives of both family and international private law. Nevertheless, there are no comprehensive studies, although the need for the development of conflict-of-laws norms exists not only in theory, but also in practice. Thus, general conflict-of-laws issues concerning permissible ways of determining competent law need to be resolved, various types of family agreements need to be implemented in practice and to be recognized in foreign jurisdictions. The author substantiates that taking into account the interests of participants in a family legal relationship is best implemented within the framework of the choice of the law to be applied by the parties to the agreement. At the same time, the author expresses concern that third parties remain beyond the conflict-of-laws choice. Thus, ensuring their interests within the framework of the agreements reached has reasonable doubts. When determining the status of a family agreement in the absence of a conflict of laws choice of the parties, the author suggests paying attention to the shortcomings and gaps of existing conflict of laws regulations for those parties to family agreements who are undoubtedly able to conclude such agreements. Expanding the range of family agreements and the possibility of their conclusion between different family members requires, in the author’s opinion, not only their regulatory support that would include conflict-of-laws regulations taking into account the interests of their participants and third parties, but also rules on recognition and enforcement encouraging quick and effective settlement of a cross-border family case, as well as proving their status and the rights and obligations that follow herewith. In the light of the main directions of improving the family legislation of Russia, it is proposed to update conflict-of-laws decisions, to ensure a more tangible impact of recognition and enforcement mechanisms regarding the institution of Russian law under consideration.

The paper is devoted to such a legal phenomenon as unauthorized construction. Unauthorized construction of buildings and structures has become widespread in modern Russia. Despite the external legalization of such buildings, many of their owners subsequently face the problem of recognizing such buildings as illegally built and the threat of demolition. The paper analyzes in detail the criteria of unauthorized construction established in civil legislation, concludes that these criteria have passed the test of time and have practically not been subjected to changes introduced into the legislation on unauthorized buildings. Moreover, they were also transferred to the draft law on reforming the Section of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation regulating property rights. The courts, when considering cases of unauthorized buildings, meet bona fide developers who did not know and should not have known that their construction was illegal, as they took all necessary measures to obtain a construction permit. One of the measures aimed at protecting bona fide developers was the provision of the law on the non-recognition as an unauthorized construction of a structure erected in violation of restrictions on the use of land, if at the time of its construction the developer did not know and could not know about the effect of such restrictions. This exception applies to construction in areas where the use of territories is limited. It was often not possible to find out about the location of these territories before. However, at present, buildings constructed in such zones are under threat of demolition. Disputes on this topic are not unique in judicial practice; they can also be brought to the European Court of Human Rights. It seems unfair to the author to demolish such buildings without paying the developer fair compensation, since the state itself often fails to provide conditions for informing the population about the existence of such zones in a particular area.

Most of the objects of patent law are created as service objects. At the same time, despite a rather detailed regulation of the legal regime of service inventions and other objects of intellectual rights in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and clarification in judicial practice, problems both in terms of legal regulation and in terms of law enforcement in this area remain unsettled. The paper discusses the reasons for the refusal to recognize and regulate as service objects the objects of related rights, the problems of the relationship between the regime of service secrets of production (know-how) and objects of patent law, in respect of which the employer decided to keep information secret, the issues concerning the legal regime of service objects created with the help of artificial intelligence, as well as ensuring the author’s right for remuneration for a service object of patent law based on the amendments to Federal Law No. 456-FZ dated 22 December 2020 «On Amendments to Parts Two and Four of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and the Invalidation of Legislative Acts (Certain Provisions of Legislative Acts) of the Russian Federation», etc. Conclusions are aimed at protecting the rights of authors-employees, in particular at the need to recognize authorship for an employee who created artificial intelligence, etc. Taking into account different points of view and the law enforcement practice, the author draws special attention to the issues of recognition of the official result of intellectual work created by the person superior to the employer operating on the basis of an employment contract (in the absence of a task, notification of the employer, etc.), which is established on the basis of the relationship between the work carried out by the director of the work and the creation of this object, as well as co-ownership of the exclusive right to a service object created by employees and authors who are not employees.

The main thesis of the study is the need for a doctrinal and rule-making transition from the opposition of civil society and public authorities to the understanding of their organic unity as an important element of modern constitutionalism. The subject matter of the paper is considered in the context of the constitutional and legal concept of responsible delegation of power by the people, the key aspect of which is a personal responsible attitude of a citizen to participating in the modern rule of the people which lies within the area of legal culture and legal awareness. The delegation of power by the people, in addition to elections, referendums and forms of representative democracy, is also associated with active participation in modern organizational formats that allow citizens to convey their will, standing, and initiatives to public authorities. These formats are the institutions of civil society that constitutes a communicative environment for achieving harmony, amity, stability and unites independent-minded responsible citizens who contribute to the development of society and the state.

The paper provides recommendations based on the systemic interrelation between the phenomena under consideration: 1. within the framework of the concept of responsible delegation of power by the people, to consider civil society as the most important space for constructive dialogue of the people — the bearer of the constituent power with the public authorities established by it; 2. in strategic planning documents, to strengthen the vector for permanent systemic interaction between public authorities at all levels with civil society institutions based on priority goals of joint resolution of national tasks, promotion of national interests, improvement of the system of guarantees of human rights and freedoms; 3. for public authorities, to use the potential of civil society institutions to a greater extent to organize public discussions of projects of socially significant decisions and regulations.

The paper considers the problems of constitutional and legal regulation in the sphere of the Russian economy; the thesis that the Constitution of the Russian Federation defines the essential features of the economy is investigated and substantiated. On the one hand, the effectiveness of constitutional legal norms depends on the state of the economy, and on the other hand, it is possible to ensure the effectiveness of the economy only through constitutional norms (norms-principles).

The paper examines the genesis of constitutional legal regulation in the field of economic relations. The norms and principles enshrined in the Soviet constitutions are analyzed. The foundations of the economic system in the Soviet period were characterized by the absence of private property rights, free competition and other economic principles. Proclamation of the new economic policy in the 20s of the 20th century entailed the formation and development of private law trends. Many of its supporters were subjected to repression in the 30s of the 20th century. The adoption of the new Constitution in 1993 led to the emergence of new directions in social development and the formation of principles in legal regulation in the economic sphere. The fundamental principles of the Constitution of the Russian Federation have the most powerful influence on the development of market relations. They determine the effectiveness of the state system, state regulation of the economy, establish the economic and social functions of the state. The place and role of the constitutional economy in the system of legal reality of Russia are determined. The constitutional foundations of the state are considered as elements of legal reality. The steady expansion of the subject of constitutional regulation in the aspect of economic relations is noted. The Constitution does not just set general standards for the regulation and development of the economic sphere, but influences the norms of other branches of law in such a way that they acquire constitutional and legal content and should be interpreted in the light of constitutional values.

Based on the analysis of the doctrine of criminal procedure law, the positions of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, the authors, using dialectical, sociological and formal logical methods, identify the main requirements for reasoning of judicial decisions in criminal proceedings. The importance of reasoning of judicial decisions in criminal proceedings is considered. The results of the study make it possible to conclude that a reasoned court decision allows participants to the process to understand and evaluate the reasons for its issuance. The reasonableness of the court decision is an indispensable condition for a fair trial and fair justice in general. Proper reasoning of a judicial decision allows ensuring the right to appeal it to a higher court. The reasons, for which the decisions were made, as well as the rationale for their adoption, allow you to appeal these arguments and conclusions of the court.

The most common cases of violation of the most important rights of participants in criminal proceedings when making court decisions and reasoning them are: unreasoned refusal to attach evidence; unreasoned detention; unreasoned disclosure of testimony of witnesses absent from the court session; unreasoned «secrecy» of witnesses; unreasoned decisions on complaints of ill-treatment, illegal methods of investigation.

The content of the reasoning of the court decision depends on its nature. The highest degree of reasoning and persuasiveness should be the final court decisions that resolve the criminal law conflict in essence, as well as decisions that most significantly affect the most important constitutional rights of citizens. The reasoning of court decisions increases the degree of public confidence in the court and the transparency of justice.

The paper is devoted to the possibility of using judicial discretion, criteria and objective limits of its action in the resolution of criminal cases. The ambiguous attitude of the professional community to discretion in the application of law is noted: from the justification of the necessity and inevitability of its existence in court proceedings to its denial as not conforming to the principle of legality. The author shares the position of scholars that the use of judicial discretion is inevitable in criminal proceedings, since it is dictated by the process of applying the rule of law to specific life situations, but its unjustified expansion is unacceptable.

It is concluded that the use of judicial discretion is inextricably linked with the formation of internal conviction. At the same time, the misconceptions about this connection found in scientific sources are critically evaluated. Proceeding from the fact that the criminal procedure law prescribes the court to be based on internal conviction when making decisions, and the use of discretion is the choice of a decision from the alternatives provided for by law, it means that the use of judicial discretion is the result of the formation of an internal conviction of the court. Regarding the question of what should limit the freedom of discretion, the author notes that the answer to it follows from the requirements of Part 4 of Article 7 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the compliance of any decision in criminal proceedings with the requirement of legality, as well as from the content of Article 17 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, prescribing to be guided in their decisions by internal conviction. The legislator names the law and the conscience of the decision-making subject as the criteria of the latter. Each of these categories reflects the sphere of due, therefore, they should also be factors limiting the freedom of discretion. Therefore, the criteria that ensure the fairness of the judge’s decision at discretion, and at the same time the limitations of its application are the law, internal conviction and conscience of the judge.

Any paradigmatic social shifts are accompanied with changes in the law. The trend towards sustainable development in a sense replaces the trend towards globalization, turning today into a solo social agenda. The law should not develop in a post-factum logic, but work ahead of the curve, especially if we want to achieve country leadership.

Sustainable development law, being a superstructure over a society that is being rebuilt in the spirit of sustainable development, becomes a supernova concept, an interdisciplinary, supra-sectoral regulatory array that undermines the foundations of legal architecture and taxonomy.

Sustainable development law is not reducible to environmental, climate, international law; it incorporates the principles and individual institutions of civil, investment, financial, banking, labor, corporate, private international law and other branches. It is compound and complex and requires the formation of a new multi-recognition core. The role of lawyers is to normalize the ongoing processes and build an up-to-date architecture of law, taking into account state and public strategic interests. This requires the formation of a sustainable development law doctrine, the development of regulatory models in the field of transition to a green and low-carbon economy and energy, alternative energy sources, climate security, «green» financing and investment, in the field of business sustainability, the implementation of social policy and new management patterns.

The paper analyzes the subject of sustainable development law, attempts to formulate the concept of sustainable development law, and searches for a methodology. The scientific search for a theoretical foundation for the law of sustainable development leads to the assumption that it is possible to study the latter through the prism of the scientific concept of the legal understanding of the American jurist Scott Shapiro, built around the legal theory of planning.

The paper is devoted to the methodological foundations of the study of the history of political and legal thought. Political and legal doctrines play an important role in the life of a state-organized society. The influence of ideas is especially noticeable, but rather their struggle in the modern world. If earlier the public consciousness was somehow fueled by illusions of a certain kind, today it is not. As there are no more illusions. Everything is very clearly marked. Agreement with the influence of ideas on the practice of state legal construction, and more broadly, the entire system of international relations, inevitably raises questions about the methodological foundations of political and legal doctrines and methodological tools that are used in modern legal science. The history of political and legal doctrines occupies a special place in the system of legal disciplines. This feature is related to its methodological functions. The paper focuses on the fact that the history of political and legal doctrines as an integral part of the theoretical and historical legal sciences, on the one hand, uses methods of cognition that are common to various branches of scientific knowledge, and on the other hand, this scientific discipline has its own scientific potential. This is what brings it closer to the general theory of law and the state as its history and at the same time separates it from other legal sciences, primarily branch sciences, which do not have their own methodological tools. The paper states that the history of political and legal doctrines has its own methodological foundations for the study of political and legal thought. In addition to the methodological component, the paper also touches on the problem of the increasing role of the history of political and legal doctrines.

The paper is devoted to the problem of approaches to the legal organization of professional activity of an athlete. In the field of professional sports, it is easy to find almost all known methods of legal influence: from prohibitions, obligations and restrictions to encouragement, stimulation, permission. But the method that has the greatest impact on relations with the participation of professional athletes is based on the fact that the personal will (decisions) of athletes determines this activity in basic legal facts and features. The legal regulation of professional activity of athletes develops primarily under the influence of dispositive norms, supplemented in appropriate cases by mandatory norms. To characterize the methods of regulating relations in sports, it is necessary to take into account a number of circumstances atypical for ordinary legal regulation (for example, a feature of the sphere under consideration is a layer of relatively soft methods of influence, i.e. explanations and recommendations). Among the special methods of regulating sports activities was and remains one or another way of combining acts of law-making, formed both in the field of state legal influence and in the field of corporate law-making. An intersectoral approach is essential in the development of regulatory impact on relations in professional sports, which allows taking into account the impact of various rules on certain relationships, which will potentially allow for a more reasonable distribution of rights and obligations, achieve the goals of legislative and other regulation, as well as effectively protect the subjects of rights. When constructing and organizing legal material containing complex (in-industry) regulation of relations in sports, it would be correct to use the techniques of private international law based on various conflict of laws bindings. The author concludes that it is necessary to continue work on optimizing the methods of regulating relations in professional sports.