Nature Of Legal Rights Research Articles

The Content of the Right in the Civil Law

Determining the content of the civil right and its main features is one of the most important issues of civil law. The aim of the research is firstly to critically analyze the theories about a right, and then determine the content of the civil right and its features. We will try to throw light on the methodological foundations of civil rights and the relationship between its legal and factual origins.
 Clarifying the issue is important to define the legal nature of civil rights and make out what a subject can protect, where the actual opportunity of a person ends, and from which moment it acquires a legal form. Accordingly, the topic is engrossing from the perspective of legal protection of interests of a subject which provides it with more practical significance.
 The research has revealed that theories of rights are flawed and cannot explain the legal nature of rights individually. Therefore, a right should not be reduced to only one component recognized by either one or the other theory. It is appropriate to consider a right in close relation to a duty and distinguish it from the actual possibility. A civil right is studied as an opportunity provided by civil law to perform an action that can be based on both law and contract. This is especially noteworthy within the framework of the principle of ‘’Everything that is not prohibited is permitted’’. Accordingly, the scope of the concept of civil rights should be much wider than the content of public rights.

Regarding the preventive protection of public interests in a field of urban planning

The article aims to conduct a theoretical analysis of an issue of a possibility of the preventive protection of public interests, in particular, on an example of economic legal relations in the field of urban planning. The research methodology has included a generalization of theoretical approaches to understanding the concepts of "public interests" and "preventive protection of rights" (including in a field of economic law and procedural legal science), available in legal science, research a content of public interests in the field of urban planning and further analysis of a legal nature of rights and the interests that state architectural and construction control bodies defend in court, and a nature of the respective lawsuits. At the same time, terminological, systemic-structural, legal-dogmatic methods and interdisciplinary analysis were applied. The results. The author expressed a working hypothesis about a possibility of going to court with preventive lawsuits, which will protect not only private rights and interests, but also public interests, and proved it with arguments on the example of lawsuits by SACC bodies in the field of urban planning. It is substantiated that a number of lawsuits that may be brought to court by SACC bodies may have the purpose of preventive protection of public interests in the sustainable development of the community territory, prevention of possible harm to the life and health of citizens, the property of individuals and legal entities and the surrounding natural environment, cultural/ archeological heritage. The author also substantiated the existence of a public interest in compliance with legislation, which is transformed into an interest in ensuring legal economic order in the field of economy. In domestic scientific literature the issue of preventive protection of public interests was generally not objectively analyzed, which constitutes the scientific novelty of the conducted research. The results of the study contribute to the scientific study of the issue of the protection of public interests in court and the preventive protection of rights and interests in court, which will further contribute to the justification of changes to the procedural legislation on the possibility of preventive judicial protection of public interests. This is the practical significance of the work.

ОСОБЛИВОСТІ СТРУКТУРИ МЕХАНІЗМУ ЗАХИСТУ ПРАВ ТА СВОБОД ЛЮДИНИ В УКРАЇНІ

The components of the mechanism for the protection of human rights in Ukraine are determined on the basis of the analysis of the norms of the Constitution of Ukraine, national legislation, works of modern domestic scientific and theoretical concepts regarding the legal nature of rights and freedoms of man and citizen. Special attention is paid to the mechanism for the protection of human rights as a system of means and factors creating the necessary conditions for respect for human rights and freedoms; the elements that are part of the mechanism for human rightsprotection. It is concluded that in Ukraine, at the legislative level, the structure of those bodies that are part of the mechanism for the protection of human rights and freedoms in Ukraine is clearly defined. The legislation also defines the powers and main responsibilities of each body in the field of the protection of rights of man and citizen. The structure of the mechanism for the protection of human rights and freedoms in Ukraine includes: the President of Ukraine, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, local state administrations, local self-government bodies, courts of general jurisdiction, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, the Ombudsman, the prosecutor's office, the advocacy, other law enforcement agencies of Ukraine such as the National Police and Security Service of Ukraine, associations of citizens. Thus, it confirms that in Ukraine there is a branched structure of bodies to protect human rights and freedoms. A significant step in protecting human rights and freedoms is to expand the powers of local governments. It enables the implementation of private interests in the light of the interests of the state and provides additional opportunities for citizens to independently protect their rights and freedoms without appealing for the protection of the violated rights to state bodies. Today, the bodies that protect human rights and freedoms can be conditionally divided into state and non-state, and it is determined by the possibility of state-power influence.

Юридическая природа прав на биологические материалы человеческого организма

The past century launched a new era of biotechnology characterized by the penetration of biology into all areas of human life, in particular blood transfusion, organ transplantation and tissue transplantation, sex change, artificial insemination, surrogacy. At the same time, there are still no laws and regulations governing the issues of the proprietary status of human organs and tissues, the correlation between real and personal non-property rights with respect to human biological materials. The study analyzes various scientific concepts regarding the legal nature of rights to human biological materials in terms of the possible involvement of these objects in civil turnout. The research concludes that it is possible to recognize individual biomaterials as things from the standpoint of civil law.

Negotiating the (legal) right to the city: Public housing demolition and the federal courts in two postindustrial U.S. cities

ABSTRACTPublic housing reform has fostered widespread revitalization in American cities. Courts have been critical to this process, but so far urban scholars have not yet closely analyzed this role. This article illuminates how courts participated in reform, sometimes empowering and at other times disempowering tenants. Looking at litigation filed by tenants to fight demolition, I examine how courts framed disputes in legal terms and how the judicial stance on demolition coevolved with national policy debate. In particular, I emphasize how tenants tapped into the ideological power of rights in American society and show that courts never explicitly rejected the notion that tenants held rights against demolition but instead gradually adopted urban planning sensibilities that implicitly denied rights to tenants. Thus, this article reveals the complicated and paradoxical nature of legal rights in the Right to the City struggles.

The Vacuous Concept of Shareholder Voting Rights

The shareholder empowerment debate in corporate law is premised upon a reoccurring assumption that, historically, there has been an erosion of shareholder rights. This article contends that this premise is inaccurate and that shareholder rights have remained fundamentally constant. It goes on to argue that a more promising approach to the existing understanding of rights in the shareholder empowerment debate may be found in the broader legal rights literature. In analysing shareholder rights through this lens it is contended that, while there has not been an appreciable abrogation of shareholder rights, it is in the nature of legal rights per se to contain power whilst simultaneously reinforcing the institutions and structures from where those rights emanate.

Nature of Bank Deposits in France

The author examines the legal nature of rights that a person acquires upon transfer of money to a bank in France. In particular, a question arises who the owner of money held with a bank is. The author argues that a distinction is to be made between actual banknotes or coins that are transferred and a 'deposit', i.e., personal claim against the bank. Bank deposits held for a fixed term in France are called Compte a Terme or term deposit accounts. In France, consumers prefer using cards or cheques for most purchases and tend to pay cash only for small sums. FICOBA registers all financial accounts which are open on French territory, including accounts held in the name of natural and legal persons, as well as for non-residents. The article describes the position of France law in relation to the bank deposit and concludes that the main legal features of bank deposit are similar to those of a loan.

The Legal Nature of Bank Deposits

AbstractThe author examines the legal nature of rights that a person acquires upon transfer of money to a bank. In particular, a question arises who the owner of money held with a bank is. The author argues that a distinction is to be made between actual banknotes or coins that are transferred and a 'deposit', i.e., personal claim against the bank. The article describes the position of Lithuanian law in relation to the bank deposit and concludes that the main legal features of bank deposit are similar to those of a loan. Upon transfer of banknotes or coins to the bank, the latter normally acquires ownership thereof, and the depositor acquires personal rights against the bank. Although the depositor may also be regarded as the owner of such a claim, the object of such ownership is incorporeal and is not related to the banknotes or coins transferred to the bank.

Functionalism and Formalism: Their Latest Incarnations in Contemporary Development and Governance Debates

cloaked in the rhetoric of legalism. In short, Willis had a sharp sense of the relationship between professional debates in law and the larger political conflicts and transformations in which they played a part. John Willis and his contemporaries were proponents of functionalism as a means to resolve regulatory controversies. Functionalism began as an antidote to a conceptualism that attempted to divorce legal reasoning from context in adjudication. The realists debunked the analytic infrastructure upon which formalism rested. They also invoked the demands of modernization and the authority of social science in response to those, including judges, who defended adjudicative practices that were inimical to the expressed desires of democratic electorates in the name of the inherent nature of legal rights and the demands of the rule of law. Instead of the generation of legal entitlements from the germ of a legal idea or concept, they proposed a pragmatic, empirically grounded analysis of the relationship between legal rules and the social world in which they operated and which they helped to construct and a frank balancing of the rights and interests at stake in the choices on offer. As a counter-strategy, a means of ensuring that the space to further democratic political agendas was not crowded out by a muscular judiciary with defensive territorial ambitions, functionalism worked well for a certain period of time. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, functionalist and formalist arguments in law have resurfaced, albeit in an altered form, as have many of the concerns, controversies, and claims with which they were originally connected. However, the relationship between these arguments and institutional projects is now very different. For example, we are once again arguing about the extent to which corporate activities

Law and Cultural Conflict

The relationship between law and cultural conflict is a subject that is relevant to numerous contemporary disagreements about the substance of rights. The article does not attempt to intervene into these disagreements, but instead to construct a common framework of analysis that might facilitate constructive dialogue among those who would otherwise disagree. The framework offers three dimensions in which the relationship of law to cultural conflict might be assessed. The first dimension concerns the sociological relationship between law and culture. The simplest model of this relationship, which the article calls the model, assumes that law is the expression of a coherent antecedent culture that is the ultimate source of society's identity and authority. This view of law underlies many contemporary formulations of constitutional and common law, as well as various claims to national self-determination and multiculturalism. The Devlin model is radically oversimplified, however, because it undertheorizes both law and culture. It fails to recognize the many ways in which law can not only enforce an antecedent culture, but also constitute that culture, as well as displace it in the name of instrumental rationality. The Devlin model also fails to recognize that a society's culture is typically neither stable, coherent nor singular. The article offers a typology of the various relationships that law can assume with cultural contestation and heterogeneity. The second dimension concerns the form of legal intervention. Different forms of interventions place the law in different relationships with cultural conflict. Legislation differs from adjudication; criminal law differs from administration regulation. The article uses the case of Romer v. Evans to explore how the fact of cultural conflict can affect the creation of judicially created constitutional rights. The dialectic between cultural conflict and judicially-enforced constitutional rights should primarily be understood as a matter addressed by the substantive jurisprudence of constitutional law. The third dimension concerns the nature of legal rights. Some rights, like those protected by the First Amendment, promote cultural diversity in ways that other rights, like those protected by the Equal Protection Clause do not. The first kind of rights are hospitable to cultural conflict; the second are not. The distinction turns on the difference between rights that understand cultural values as instantiated by particular forms of social relationships, and rights that understand the prevention of state regulation as a necessary but not sufficient condition for the realization of cultural values. The article parses the various factors that are relevant for determining which kinds of rights the law ought to implement.

On the Nature of Legal Rights

This article seeks to uphold the Interest Theory of legal rights by arguing that such a theory can withstand objections and handle difficulties that are often posed against it. Building on the author’s previous defences of the Interest Theory, the present article also seeks to expose some serious shortcomings in competing theories. Among the topics covered are the role of legal powers of enforcing or waiving legal rights; the possibility of rights to be mistreated; and the status of inoperative rights. In each case, so the article argues, the complexities of the issues involved can best be handled by a theory which maintains that the essential function of legal rights is the protection of various aspects of people’s well-being.

Dworkin, Hart, and the Problem of Theoretical Perspective

The following article analyzes the dispute between legal philosophers Ronald Dworkin and H.L.A. Hart over the nature of legal rights. The author argues that central to this dispute is a pervasive methodological problem of social theory, the “problem of theoretical perspective.” He makes use of a distinction between “internal” and “external” perspectives to defend what he conceives to be Hart's more fully social approach to the conceptualization of legal rights.

The Nature of Legal Rights and Duties

The Nature of Legal Rights and Duties