• A
  • A
  • A
  • ABC
  • ABC
  • ABC
  • А
  • А
  • А
  • А
  • А
Regular version of the site
Search

Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 27 November 2012 № 8651/12 in the case The entrepreneur Guliamov vs The Astrakhan Directorate of Federal Migration Service

Point of law: whether a court may substitute an administrative fine imposed upon entrepreneur with the suspension of activity (considered by law as a more strict punishment), based only on the entrepreneur’s own desire?

Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 26 November 2012 № 28-П on the review of constitutionality of Section 1 of Article 16.2 and Section 2 of Article 27.11 of the Administrative Offences Code of the Russian Federation in connection with the complaint of the Limited Liability Company “Avesta”

Legal issue: whether the constitutional rights of the applicant (a legal entity) were violated by the rules of legislation, which make the amount of fine for the failure to declare a commodity at customs dependent upon such insufficiently clear notion as market value of this commodity in the Russian Federation?

Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 15 November 2012 № 26-П on the review of constitutionality of a provision of part 2 of Art 10 of the Federal Law “On the State Civil Service of the Russian Federation” in connection with the request of the Legislative Assembly of Kamchatka Region

Legal issue: the constitutionality of the requirement, according to which a regional register of offices of the State civil service should be composed with due regard to the structure of State bodies, names, categories, and groups of offices established by the federal register, if in practice it is understood as a requirement of identity of two registers and of the formation of the structure of regional State bodies by analogy with the structure of the respective federal State bodies?

Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 7 November 2012 № 24-П on the review of constitutionality of part 1 of Article 2 of the Federal law of 12 February 2001 № 5-ФЗ “On Making Changes in and Amendments to the Law of the Russian Federation “On the Social Protection of the Citizens Affected by the Radiation As a Result of the Catastrophe of Chernobyl APP” in the interpretation given to its provisions in the law-application practice after the entering into force of the Judgment of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of 20 December 2010 № 21-П, in connection with the complaint of the citizen R.Inamov

Legal issue: whether the contested provisions, as interpreted by law-application practice in the wake of the Judgment of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of 20 December 2010 № 21-П, are conformant to the Constitution, as long as they serve as a ground for refusal of calculating the amount of monetary compensation to disabled persons from the ranks of military personnel who took part in the liquidation of Chernobyl catastrophe, on the basis of their money allowance with due regard to the degree of the loss of their work capacity?

Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 15 October 2012 № 21-П on the review of constitutionality of para 21 of Art 15 of the Federal law “On the Status of the Military Personnel” in connection with the complaint of citizen N.M.Kabulov

Legal issue: whether the contested provisions are constitutional, if their uncertainty allow for depriving of the right to dwelling the citizens dismissed from military service who before 1 January 2005 were registered by the bodies of local self-government as persons in need of dwelling, but subsequently moved to another region for permanent residence and were reregistered there after that date, - as opposed to the citizens of the same category who did not change their place of residence.

Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 20 July 2012 № 20-П on the review of constitutionality of the provisions of part 1 of Article 125 and part 1 of Article 152 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in connection with the complaint of the citizen R.G.Mishina

Legal issue: whether it is true that the contested provisions permit to arbitrarily establish the territorial jurisdiction of cases concerning the complaints against the decisions and actions (or failure to act) of the officials of investigative agencies and by so doing contradict the Constitution?

Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 18 July 2012 № 19-П on the review of constitutionality of part 1 of Article 1, Part 1 of Article 2 and Article 3 of the Federal law “On the Procedure for Consideration of Petitions of Citizens of the Russian Federation”

Legal issue: whether the contested provisions are constitutional as long as they: do not extend to legal persons the right to send individual and group petitions to State and municipal bodies; do not determine whether the authorities of constitutive entities of the Russian Federation have the right to provide additional (as compared to the federal law) guarantees of the citizens’ rights to petition, including the guarantees concerning: a) the petitions addressed to State and municipal enterprises and institutions, and б) the extension of guarantees established for petitions of citizens to those of legal persons.

Judgment of the Presidium of Supreme Commercial Court of 10 July 2012 № 17713/11 in the case The company “The Silver of Maghadan” vs The Interdistrict Tax Inspection № 1 for Maghadan Region

Point of law: is it lawful to have in an export contract, under which silver is sold abroad, a clause establishing a “price corridor” in the form of admissible deviations from the price of the silver in the world market?

Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 30 March 2012 № 9-П on the review of constitutionality of part 2 of Article 4 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On Privatisation of Housing Fund in the Russian Federation” in connection with the complaint of administration of the municipal formation “Zvenigovskii municipal district” of Marii El Republic

Legal issue: whether the contested provision, in violation of constitutional principles of equality and rule of law as well as constitutional prohibition against restrictions of rights of local self-government as to independent management of municipal property, does not allow the bodies of local self-government to adopt decisions in the form of a normative act concerning the privatisation of employment-related apartments in the absence of a special regional normative act to that effect.

Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 28 February 2012 № 4-П on the review of constitutionality of para 11 of Art 12 of the Federal law “On General Principles of Organisation of Legislative (Representative) and Executive Bodies of State Power of the Constituent Entities of the Russian Federation” in connection with the complaint of citizen T.I.Romanova

Legal issue: whether the contested regulation is constitutional, given that it served as a ground for the exclusion of a deputy of legislative (representative) body of State power of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation from a party group in the regional parliament and for the pre-term termination of his powers is case of his leaving the political party on whose list of candidates he had been elected and whose group in parliament he is a member of?

 

Have you spotted a typo?
Highlight it, click Ctrl+Enter and send us a message. Thank you for your help!
To be used only for spelling or punctuation mistakes.