Judicial enforcement as a specific type of law enforcement: administrative and legal aspect

Yevhenii Doiar
{"title":"Judicial enforcement as a specific type of law enforcement: administrative and legal aspect","authors":"Yevhenii Doiar","doi":"10.24144/2788-6018.2024.02.73","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the article, the author reflects on the possibility of recognizing judicial enforcement as a specific type of law enforcement. Proceeding from the already finally formed position of recognition of application as a separate independent form of implementation of the norms of administrative law, along with its other forms - implementation, compliance, use, the author directs his scientific search to the study of the specifics of law enforcement by its special subject - the court . Having analyzed the arguments available in scientific sources about the specifics of judicial enforcement, the author rejects most of the features that are proposed in scientific sources as being inherent only in judicial enforcement (simultaneous and related application of not only the norms of substantive law, but also the norms of procedural law; legal interpretation activity court; the need to coordinate judicial enforcement with judicial practice) as those that characterize the enforcement activity not only of courts, but also of other subjects. Such a deficiency of normative regulation is indicated, such as the lack of normative definitions of the concepts of \"norms of material norm” (\"material norms”, \"substantive law”, other similar), \"norms of procedural law” (\"procedural norms”, \"procedural law”, other similar ), as well as \"application of legal norms”, \"application of material law norms”, \"application of procedural law norms”, etc. As criteria for distinguishing judicial application as a separate type of law enforcement, the author considers: the specificity of the subject of application itself; different from other cases of (non-judicial) application of normative regulation of relevant procedural issues, and the content of the concepts \"type” and \"typing” is taken into account. It is indicated that, in the absence of a unified approach to determining the content of all forms of implementation of legal norms (execution, use, compliance, application), it is problematic (and will remain until the normative resolution of this issue) to attribute certain actions of the court in the implementation of procedural norms to certain specific forms The author considers the possibility of interpreting the actions of the court to implement procedural norms in some cases as \"use” and in others as \"application” as a promising direction for further discussions.","PeriodicalId":227965,"journal":{"name":"Analytical and Comparative Jurisprudence","volume":" 14","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Analytical and Comparative Jurisprudence","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24144/2788-6018.2024.02.73","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the article, the author reflects on the possibility of recognizing judicial enforcement as a specific type of law enforcement. Proceeding from the already finally formed position of recognition of application as a separate independent form of implementation of the norms of administrative law, along with its other forms - implementation, compliance, use, the author directs his scientific search to the study of the specifics of law enforcement by its special subject - the court . Having analyzed the arguments available in scientific sources about the specifics of judicial enforcement, the author rejects most of the features that are proposed in scientific sources as being inherent only in judicial enforcement (simultaneous and related application of not only the norms of substantive law, but also the norms of procedural law; legal interpretation activity court; the need to coordinate judicial enforcement with judicial practice) as those that characterize the enforcement activity not only of courts, but also of other subjects. Such a deficiency of normative regulation is indicated, such as the lack of normative definitions of the concepts of "norms of material norm” ("material norms”, "substantive law”, other similar), "norms of procedural law” ("procedural norms”, "procedural law”, other similar ), as well as "application of legal norms”, "application of material law norms”, "application of procedural law norms”, etc. As criteria for distinguishing judicial application as a separate type of law enforcement, the author considers: the specificity of the subject of application itself; different from other cases of (non-judicial) application of normative regulation of relevant procedural issues, and the content of the concepts "type” and "typing” is taken into account. It is indicated that, in the absence of a unified approach to determining the content of all forms of implementation of legal norms (execution, use, compliance, application), it is problematic (and will remain until the normative resolution of this issue) to attribute certain actions of the court in the implementation of procedural norms to certain specific forms The author considers the possibility of interpreting the actions of the court to implement procedural norms in some cases as "use” and in others as "application” as a promising direction for further discussions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
司法执行作为一种特殊的执法方式:行政和法律方面
在这篇文章中,作者思考了承认司法执行是一种特殊执法类型的可能性。作者从承认适用是执行行政法规范的一种单独的独立形式,以及行政法规范的其他形式--执行、遵守、使用--这一已经最终形成的立场出发,将其科学探索引向对其特殊主体--法院--执法的具体情况的研究。在分析了科学资料中关于司法执行的具体情况的论点后,作者否定了科学资料中提出的大多数仅为司法执行所固有的特征(不仅同时和相关地适用实体法规范,而且适用程序法规范;法院的法律解释活动;司法执行与司法实践相协调的必要性),认为这些特征不仅是法院执行活动的特征,也是其他主体执行活动的特征。这种规范性规定的不足表现在,"实体规范"("实体规范"、"实体法"、其他类似概念)、"程序法规范"("程序规范"、"程序法"、其他类似概念)以及 "法律规范的适用"、"实体法规范的适用"、"程序法规范的适用 "等概念缺乏规范性定义。作为区分司法适用作为一种单独的执法类型的标准,作者认为:适用主体本身的特殊性;不同于其他(非司法)适用相关程序问题的规范性规定的情况,并考虑到 "类型 "和 "类型化 "概念的内容。作者认为,将法院执行程序规范的行为在某些情况下解释为 "使用",在另一些情况下解释为 "适用",是一个有希望的进一步讨论方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Independence of judges as a constitutional principle and deontological basis of the judicial profession Corruption risks during public procurement in the conditions of military status The state of scientific development of the problems of criminal liability for gender-based violence in the context of armed conflict (martial law) in Ukraine in 2019-2022 Internal threats to the national security of Ukraine Financial assets in the system of financial legal relations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1