Cross-Sectoral Nature of the Category «Damage» and Actual Problems of Interrelation of Civil, Criminal, Criminal Procedural, Arbitration and Budgetary Legislation of the RF

Abstract

The legal field frames social relations that arise and develop in modern society and the state. These or other legal relations are regulated, as a rule, by a specific branch of legislation, for example, budgetary, criminal, criminal procedural, arbitration, etc. Operating sometimes with the same legal categories, nevertheless, each of the branches of legislation can invest in the corresponding concept their especially, to introduce elements inherent only in this industry. This can easily be traced to an example of such a thing as currency. According to Part 2 of Art. 1 of the Federal Law of 10.12.2003 No. 173-FZ «On currency regulation and currency control» the institutions, concepts and terms of civil and administrative legislation of the Russian Federation and other branches of the legislation of the Russian Federation used in this federal law are applied in the sense in which they are used in these branches of the legislation of the Russian Federation, unless otherwise provided by this federal law. In other words, the concept of «currency» can have different meanings and, accordingly, will be treated differently within the framework of a specific branch of legislation.Meanwhile, such an approach can not be considered legitimate insofar as the different interpretation of the same term in different branches of legislation does not allow to fully realize the constitutional rights and freedoms of citizens. After all, branches of legislation do not exist in isolation from one another but are interrelated.The domestic law-enforcer, among other things, constantly starts with a category such as «damage». The article is devoted to the analysis of the problem of different interpretation of the category «damage» in relation to domestic and international legislation, and also discloses the problems of inconsistency of various branches of legislation. It is concluded that the person conducting the proceedings in the case can and is obliged, based on the analysis of the circumstances under consideration, to proceed from a comprehensive assessment of the category used in making the decision as applied to its understanding in aggregate in various branches of legislation. Besides it is necessary to create universal state data base for judges, prosecutors, investigators, etc., which would allow cross-sectoral free information exchange on the same subject.