Institution Of Customary Law Research Articles

Regulacja prawna zaręczyn w Polsce

W polskim systemie prawnym instytucja zaręczyn była regulowane niezależnie od siebie zarówno w prawie cywilnym, jak i kanonicznym. W prawie cywilnym były początkowo instytucją prawa zwyczajowego. W obcych porządkach prawnych obowiązujących na terytorium Polski w wieku XIX i pierwszej połowie wieku XX instytucja zaręczyn znalazła się w większości kodeksów. Regulacje te chroniły swobodę zawarcia małżeństwa, różne natomiast mogły być skutki majątkowe. Dopiero po drugiej wojnie światowej w Polsce udało się stworzyć własne prawo małżeńskie, które przez kilka lat obejmowało także zaręczyny. W prawie kanonicznym przez długi okres nie było jednolitych przepisów w odniesieniu do zaręczyn. Na początku XX wieku wprowadzono wymogi dotyczące prawnej formy zaręczyn. Przepisy te nie przetrwały jednak do czasów współczesnych.

Prozhitok as the Estate in Land in the Muscovite State: from the 16th Century to the First Half of the 17th Century

In the Muscovite State of the second half of the 15th century the pomest’e system began to take shape. The pomest’e estates were granted by the crown or the church on condition of service and held for a period of service only. The holders were not entitled to dispose of pomest’e lands, and their estates were not hereditary. It raised the question of how the needs of retired servicemen and decedents’ family members should be supplied. The question was resolved by means of prozhitok — the law institution that provided the opportunity for the above-mentioned persons to obtain a part of pomest’e land without condition of service.The prozhitok estate provided the limited proprietary right in land. It was granted for a lifetime of a holder who was not entitled to dispose of the land plot. The decisions to grant the prozhitok estates were taken by the landowners (the crown or the church) on a basis of a petition. The sizes of granted land plots were determined on a case-by-case basis. The unified rules for determination of land plots’ sizes were established only in the second quarter of the 17th century.The prozhitok estate could be granted only to the holders of the pomest’e estates and their family members unable to do military service and thus not eligible to obtain or retain the pomest’e estates. In most cases the prozhitok estates were granted to the widows and unmarried daughters of the deceased holders of the pomest’e estates or more rarely to their mothers and unmarried sisters. Also the prozhitok estates could be granted to the holders of the pomest’e estates retired from service because of old age or ailment and to the sons of the deceased holders unable to do military service because of ailment.Typically, the prozhitok estate was considered as terminated after the death of its holder or taking the monastic vows. It was also considered terminated when its female holder entered into marriage. When the prozhitok estate was terminated the land plot was returned to the crown or the church and then granted to some serviceman as the pomest’e estate. It means that the land plot was held without condition of service only temporarily. The lack of vacant pomest’e lands forced the landowners to grant the land plots before the prozhitok estates termination. So the new type of grant — pozhid — was invented. The pozhid estate resembled the pomest’e estate on hold: the exercise of the holder’s rights was delayed until the prozhiok estate termination. For several reasons such grants were forbidden in 1621–1622. Over many years prozhitok developed as the institution of customary law. It became the subject of legislative regulation only in the twenties of the 17th century. The enactment of Sobornoye Ulozhenie in 1649 was crucial for the prozhitok institution as the code generalized the experience in application of legal norms and systematized the acts related to the prozhitok estates.

Responsibility in International Law: General Principle or Institution of Customary Law?

The present contribution addresses some fundamental, but still unresolved, issues concerning the sources of international law – the mutual relations and interactions between them and the determination of the character of particular norms of international law in the context of their assignment to the appropriate sources. However, it is done by a means of reference to a specific case of norms concerning international responsibility. As the examination of their nature will show, a relationship between different sources may not necessarily be hierarchical or exclusive; it may be just complementary and evolving. Keywords: interational responsibility customary law, general principle

Rebuilding the Justice Sector of Afghanistan

The Afghan authorities and the international community have worked together to rebuild the justice sector into something which now at least approximates to a system that conforms to international standards. This article argues that while the process has been fraught there have been tangible advances and some verifiable ways to measure this. Capacity-building support of the state system will require continuing external monitoring, to gauge its impact, and the state system also has an important role in monitoring the way in which customary law institutions dispense justice. This article concludes that, despite many set-backs and uncertainties, now is not the time for the international community to turn its back on justice sector reform in Afghanistan.

Constitutional status of local self-government in Serbia

Local self-government in Serbia is a level of power which has a long tradition. The local power has evolved from the institution of customary law to the constitutional right of citizens which limits the state authority. With a historical overview, theoretical and comparative review, the article is particularly analyzing the status of local self-government in the Constitution of2006. Elements which wrap up the constitutional status of local self-government are explained and distinctively described: term, decision-making, jurisdiction, self-organization and protection of local self-government, are explained and specifically described.