ON JUDICIAL PRACTICE IN DISPUTES IN PERMISSIVE LEGAL RELATIONS IN THE SPHERE OF ECONOMIC ACTIVITY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15407/econlaw.2020.03.013Keywords:
permissive relations in a sphere of economic activity, permissive document, judicial precedent, legitimate interest, principle of acquiescenceAbstract
Ukrainian courts consider many cases related with using of norms of permissive legislation in a sphere of economic activity. The purpose of an article is to analyze a court’s rulemaking in cases on permissive relations in spheres of the town-building and the defense of an environment. The author presents and explores some legal positions of the Supreme Court. For example, there are such positions as: 1) absence of a legislation on a special permissive relations doesn’t give a right to do business without appropriate permits; 2) control organs have no power to obligate the economic subjects to receive permits in a situation as the Ukrainian Government hasn’t established a mechanism of giving permits; 3) violations of legislation during realization of rights based on permissive documents have to be confirmed in acts of authorized state organs/permissive organs drafted after the measures of the state supervision (control) in a sphere of economic activity. The author investigates court’s practice of the using of means of provision of obligations by subjects of permissive legal relations. There are court’s decisions on a suspension of enterprises/buildings which violate demands of economic and ecological legislation in a process of a realization of rights for economic operations in accordance with permissive documents. The court’s practice of using of a principle of acquiescence is analyzed in details. This analysis has concluded a declarative character of acquiescence. The author considers that in such cases court has to constitute conditions for a using of the acquiescence or its absence and to use this principle if there are enough conditions. The court’s decisions in cases about the economic operations realized without permits are investigated in the article. The analysis gives a reason to conclude that contemporary concept of a legal interest, which used by courts narrows possibilities for the defense of rights of citizens and organizations violated by breaches of an economic legislation of owners of permissive documents and nonlegal inaction of permissive organs. In addition, the author has proposed some changes for The Law of Ukrainian "On the permissive system in a sphere of economic activity".
References
Anakina T.M. Sudovyi pretsedent u pravi Yevropeiskoho Soiuzu. Avtoref. dys... kand. yuryd. nauk: 12.00.11. Kharkiv: Nats. yuryd. akad. Ukrainy im. Ya.Mudroho, 2008. 19 p. [in Ukrainian].
KMDA opublikuvala spysok nezakonnykh budivnytstv u Kyievi. Analitychnyi portal "Slovo i dilo". 11.10.2019. URL: https://www.slovoidilo.ua/2019/10/11/novyna/finansy/kmda-opublikuvala-spysok-nezakonnyx-budivnycztvkyyevi [in Ukrainian].
Zvit pro rezultaty diialnosti Derzharkhbudinspektsii za 2019 rik. Ofitsiinyi sait Derzhavnoi arkhitekturno-budivelnoi inspektsii Ukrainy. URL: https://www.dabi.gov.ua/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Richnyj-zvit-2019-1.pdf [in Ukrainian].
Tatkov V.I. Dyskusiini pytannia zabezpechennia yednosti sudovoi praktyky v hospodarskomu sudochynstvi. Universytetski naukovi zapysky. 2012. No. 4 (44). P. 239-248 [in Ukrainian].
Shevchuk S.V. Zahalnoteoretychni problemy normatyvnosti aktiv sudovoi vlady: dys. ... d-ra yuryd. nauk: 12.00.01. Kharkiv: Nats. yuryd. akad. Ukrainy im. Ya. Mudroho, 2008. 225 p. [in Ukrainian].
Dashkovska O. Sudovyi pretsedent i sudova praktyka yak dzherela prava. Visnyk Akademii pravovykh nauk Ukrainy. 2011. № 1 (64). P. 34-41 [in Ukrainian].
Topolevskyi R. Systema dzherel prava Ukrainy: suchasnyi stan i perspektyvy rozvytku. Pravo Ukrainy. 2017. No. 6. P. 27-33 [in Ukrainian].
Kot O.V. Sudovi akty v hospodarskomu protsesi Ukrainy: avtoref. dys. ... kand. yuryd. nauk: 12.00.04. Kyiv: Nats. akad. prav. nauk Ukrainy, NDI pryvat. prava i pidpryiemnytstva, 2011. 21 p. [in Ukrainian].
Dobrovolska V. Sutnist ta perspektyvy podalshoho rozvytku hospodarskoho sudochynstva. Pravo Ukrainy. 2009. No. 2. P. 176-183 [in Ukrainian].
Fedotova O., Nikolov D. Spory z DABI: novi pidkhody VC. Yurydychna hazeta. 2018. No. 43-44. URL: http:// yur-gazeta.com/publications/practice/sudova-praktika/spori-z-dabi-novi-pidhodi-vc.html [in Ukrainian].
Hubska O.A. Sudova praktyka u sporakh, poviazanykh z samovilnym budivnytstvom. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats "Budivelne pravo: problemy teorii i praktyky". Kyiv-Ternopil: Beskydy, 2017. 236 p. [in Ukrainian].
Holubieva N.Iu. Rozghliad sudamy sprav pro vyznannia prava vlasnosti na obiekty samochynnoho budivnytstva. Yurydychnyi visnyk. 2016. No. 4. P. 91-99 [in Ukrainian].
Volovyk O.A. Pohliad na pravo i rozvytok ekonomiko-pravovoho dyskursu. Kyiv: Yurinkom Inter, 2014. 272 p. [in Ukrainian].
Shhekin D.M. Juridicheskie prezumpcii v nalogovom prave. Moskow: MZ Press, 2002. 252 p. [in Russian].
Ulianovska O.V. Rozmezhuvannia poniat pravovoi prezumptsii ta pravovoi fiktsii. Pohliady providnykh naukovtsiv. Viche. 2011. No. 10. P. 26-30 [in Ukrainian].
Kelman M.S, Murashyn O.H. Zahalna teoriia derzhavy i prava: pidruchnyk. Kyiv: Kondor, 2006. 477 p. [in Ukrainian].
Kotukha O.S. Klasyfikatsiia ta kharakterystyka okremykh vydiv yurydychnyi prezumptsii. Yevropeiski perspektyvy. 2012. No. 2. Ch. 1. P. 79-86 [in Ukrainian].
Daidzhest sudovoi praktyky Verkhovnoho Sudu u sporakh, shcho vynykaiut u sferi zakhystu dovkillia ta ekolohichnykh prav. Ofitsiinyi sait Verkhovnoho Sudu. 2019. URL: https://supreme.court.gov.ua/userfiles/media/Daidjest_ Ekologia.pdf [in Ukrainian].
Apanasenko E.I. Zashhita prav, osnovannyh na licenzijah i razreshenijah, Evropejskim sudom po pravam cheloveka. Izvestija Gomel’skogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta imeni F. Skoriny. 2017. No. 2. P. 59-65 [in Russian].
