The Notion and Attributes of Right – Terminating Legal Facts
Abstract
The paper shows that the basis for the formation of the right-terminating legal facts is laid by the understanding of what should be included in the domain of these facts. The authors demonstrate that the target for understanding the nature of right-terminating legal facts is the development form based on participation of the civilians in the legal relations. As the basis, the authors highlight the civil property legal relations. The paper underlines that the need for this emerges only in case the necessary environment is formed, which strives for self-realization and integrity, contributing to the higher integration of the state into the international structures and increase in the life quality of the population due to the increase in its legal culture. The novelty of the research is defined by the authors in the fact that they have first taken the measures aimed at the general regulation of the legal standards and systemic values of the legal culture of the country. It is noted that the same measures and forms are applied in the developed countries of the European Union. The authors include into the formation of integral environment the perceptions of the legal sources by the population, as well as define the possibility of stratification of the earlier set tasks on the regulation of the forms and methods of the civilians’ participation in court sessions.
References
[2] Bhatia, K.V. 2016. Redefining the Indian public sphere: A study of the LGBT rights movement in India. Media Watch 7(2): 174-184.
[3] Costa, P. 2007. The rule of law: a historical introduction. In: The Rule of Law History, Theory and Criticism. Springer Netherlands, 73-149.
[4] Crowe, M.B. 1977. The Breaking of the Profile and its Re-Making. In: The Changing Profile of the Natural Law. Springer Netherlands, 192-222.
[5] Davies, B. 2013. EU Criminal Law in National Courts: Breaking the Monopoly? Liverpool Law Review 34(3): 241-259.
[6] Davis, M. 1988. The Relative Independence of Punishment Theory. Law and Philosophy 7(3): 321-350.
[7] Gabbay, D.M., and Woods, J. 2011. The Law of Evidence and Labelled Deduction: A Position Paper. In: Approaches to Legal Rationality. Springer Netherlands, 295-331.
[8] Galley, M. 2014. Industry Development and the Process of Disposal. In: Shipbreaking: Hazards and Liabilities. Springer International Publishing, 1-42.
[9] Graham, P.A. 2008. A Defense of Local Miracle Compatibilism. Philosophical Studies 140(1): 65-82.
[10] Haque, A.A. 2013. The Revolution and the Criminal Law. Criminal Law and Philosophy 7(2): 231-253.
[11] Kelly, B. 2015. Conclusion: Not Breaking but Making International Law? In: Military Internees, Prisoners of War and the Irish State during the Second World War. Palgrave Macmillan UK, 108-115.
[12] Kenney, S.J. 2002. Breaking the Silence: Gender Mainstreaming and the Composition of the European Court of Justice. Feminist Legal Studies 10(3): 257-270.
[13] Lebzelter, G.C. 1978. The Forces of Law and Order. In: Political Anti-Semitism in England 1918-1939. Palgrave Macmillan UK, 113-135.
[14] Looijestijn-Clearie, A. 2014. Breaking Up is Hard to Do: Dutch Unbundling Legislation and the Free Movement of Capital. European Business Organization Law Review 15(3): 337-355.
[15] Lunyachek, V., Ruban, N. 2018. Managing intellectual property rights protection in the system of comprehensive secondary education. Public Policy and Administration 17(1): 114-125.
[16] Mousourakis, G. 2012. The Law of Obligations. In: Fundamentals of Roman Private Law. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 183-277.
[17] Ravi Krishnan, C.J.R., Pichaandy, C. 2018. Fishing in the troubled water: Media framing of the human rights violations at Palk Bay. Media Watch 9(1): 141-149.
[18] Skyrms, B. 1998. Salience and Symmetry-Breaking in the Evolution of Convention. Law and Philosophy 17(4): 411-418.
[19] Spaak, T. 2014. Law, Force, and Social Morality. In: A Critical Appraisal of Karl Olivecrona’s Legal Philosophy. Springer International Publishing, 157-180.
[20] Wellman, C., and Feinberg, J. 1970. Reasons for Breaking the Law. The Journal of Value Inquiry 4(4): 261-272.
[21] Zhang, J. 2014a. Advocating Impartiality, Emphasizing Criminal Law and Neglecting Civil Law. In: The Tradition and Modern Transition of Chinese Law. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 85-127.
[22] Zhang, J. 2014b. The Thoughts and Practices of Legal Reform in the Transitional Process. In: The Tradition and Modern Transition of Chinese Law. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 555-670.
The Copyright Transfer Form to ASERS Publishing (The Publisher)
This form refers to the manuscript, which an author(s) was accepted for publication and was signed by all the authors.
The undersigned Author(s) of the above-mentioned Paper here transfer any and all copyright-rights in and to The Paper to The Publisher. The Author(s) warrants that The Paper is based on their original work and that the undersigned has the power and authority to make and execute this assignment. It is the author's responsibility to obtain written permission to quote material that has been previously published in any form. The Publisher recognizes the retained rights noted below and grants to the above authors and employers for whom the work performed royalty-free permission to reuse their materials below. Authors may reuse all or portions of the above Paper in other works, excepting the publication of the paper in the same form. Authors may reproduce or authorize others to reproduce the above Paper for the Author's personal use or for internal company use, provided that the source and The Publisher copyright notice are mentioned, that the copies are not used in any way that implies The Publisher endorsement of a product or service of an employer, and that the copies are not offered for sale as such. Authors are permitted to grant third party requests for reprinting, republishing or other types of reuse. The Authors may make limited distribution of all or portions of the above Paper prior to publication if they inform The Publisher of the nature and extent of such limited distribution prior there to. Authors retain all proprietary rights in any process, procedure, or article of manufacture described in The Paper. This agreement becomes null and void if and only if the above paper is not accepted and published by The Publisher, or is with drawn by the author(s) before acceptance by the Publisher.