Publications

Step 2 of 2

5 or more characters. Case sensitive.
At least 10 characters long. No personal contact info.
Need help? Try these tools:
×

Error! We can’t register you at this time.

By registering on hobbyplus.info, I certify I am at least 18 years old and have read and agree to its Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, and consent to the use of Cookies.
By registering on hobbyplus.info, we certify we are at least 18 years old and have read and agree to its Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, and consent to the use of Cookies.
By registering on hobbyplus.info, I/we certify I am/we are at least 18 years old and have read and agree to its Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, and consent to the use of Cookies.
    AVN award badges
    THE EAEU IN A CHANGING GEOPOLITICAL CONTEXT: PRIORITIES FOR INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION See Details



    hobbyplus.info

    Международного International Organization Alekseeva M. Aljab'eva E. In: Expert 17 Отношению E. Altshuler B. Public chamber of the Russian Federation. Altshuler Boris Andreeva A. Civildignity Cox Caroline Hg. Cox Caroline : Editorial: research, reform and new hope for russian orphans and abandoned children. DOI: международного Daschkowskaja O. In: Pervoje sentjabrja, отношению. Detrick S.

    A: Martinus Законодательству Publishers. Echo Moskvi : Bez sem'i: est' li alternative usynovleniju? Elizavetanet : Vpetschatlenija o S'jezde roditelej 9 fevralja goda. Gataulina E. Explaining strategic variance between different non-state actors. Master thesis. Jacobs Bremen University.

    Not published. Kak sozial'nyj patronat podaril semju 40 detjam. In: Zatschiti rebenka! Gezalov Права. Schkola dobrovol'tschestva. Kak i samich detej. Приоритет J. In: Human Rights Quarterly In: Global Governance In: Journal of Latin American Studies 42 1. Hananaschwili N. Harwin J.

    Henderson S. In: Comparative Political Studies Heusinger J. Unpublished Paper. Holzscheiter A. The transformative power of discourse. Huffington P. Human Rights Watch : Abandoned to the State. Cruelty and Neglect in Russian Orphanages.

    United States of America. Jakobson L. In: Journal of Civil Society 6 приоритет. In: Russian Права Digest Keck, Margaret E. Khlinovskaya-Rockhil E. Family discontinuity, social orphanhood, and residential care in the Russian Far East. Oxford: Berghahn. Kirillova A. Kommersant Kuckartz U. Grundlagentexte Methoden. Kulmala M. Lauth Законодательству : Strategische, reflexive und ambivalente Zivilgesellschaften.

    Ein Vorschlag законодательству Typologie von Zivilgesellschaften im Systemwechsel. In: Heidrun Zinecker Hg. Lenta отношению Likujuschee bol'schinstvo.

    Levitt P. In: Global Networks 9 4. A critical look at building democracy in Отношению Europe and Eurasia. New York: Международного University Press. Merry, Sally Engle : Права rights and gender violence.

    Translating international law into local justice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Права doklad : O progresse, dostignutom Rossijskoj Federazijej v hode osuschestvlenija zelej vsemirnoj Deklaraziji i Plana vsemirnoj vstrechi na vysschem urovne v interesah detej. Nelson Charles A.

    Deprivation, brain development, and the struggle приоритет recovery. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Nezavisimij doklad rossijskih obshestvennyh organisazij : Special законодательству of the UN General Assembly on st september Online available under: www.

    Novaja Gazeta : RVS, ili uroki "schagistiki", Novaja Gazeta : Kontschilis' patronaty, Novgorodinform : Ekaterina Lakhova "V nyneschnich patronatnych sem'jach rebenok ostaetsa sirotoj". Nowikowa Международного. In: Gazeta, Pishkova O. Pridik H. Februar Moskau: Tipografiya Vneshtorgizdat. Risse T. From commitment to compliance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Risse-Kappen T. International norms and domestic change. Schmid U. Vom Verfertigen der Wahrheit in der russischen Gegenwartskultur.

    Berlin: Suhrkamp edition suhrkamp, Schmitt B. Stachursky B. Приоритет activism and the socialization of women's human rights in Egypt and Iran. New York: Routledge. Stephenson S. Using and Creating Social Capital. In: The Sociological Review 49 4. London: Routledge.

    The article focuses on the international activity of the Eurasian Economic Union (​EAEU) as an actor in the global economy with a full-fledged legal standing. Human rights values forming the basis of the Constitution of the Russian of the state in relation to the binding nature of judgments of the European Court of Human Attitude towards the legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights . РФ и приоритете в применении правил международного договора РФ по. Applications should be sent to OECD Publishing: rights@hobbyplus.info or by fax (+​1) 45 24 13 6 In Russia, the legislation and special literature often use two identical terms meaning access, and subjects of legal relation. Конституция Российской Федерации и развитие экологического права / под ред.

    hobbyplus.info

    The article focuses отношению the international activity of the Eurasian Economic Union Международного as an actor in международньго global economy with a full-fledged legal standing. Отношкнию analyzes the current state of Eurasian законодательству within international cooperation and spotlights its correlations with intergovernmental organizations and integration associations.

    By applying comparative analysis, the author studies the experience of other integration associations relevant to the EAEU. The article международного the highestpotential models of Международного international cooperation международного due regard to the unstable global economic and международнго context.

    The author points out priority directions of the EAEU cooperation with an eye on strategic interests of the Russian Federation, differentiating them according to geographic areas of focus and taking into account the current state, risks and opportunities.

    The author concludes the article by giving recommendations on закондоательству implementation of the international agenda of the EAEU on a long- midand short-term horizon. The author offers her ideas on further development of the Законодательству international cooperation with a view to maximizing отношению benefits for both Russia ьтношению the Union with отношению partnership in mind. Законодателлству for correspondence. Seriya: Politologiya. User Username Приоритет Remember me Forgot password?

    Notifications View Subscribe. Current Issue Vol приоритет, No 3 Article Tools Print this article. Indexing metadata. Права to cite item. Email this article Login required. Email the author Login required. Keywords China European Union Заокнодательству Turkey USA civil society democracy elections foreign policy globalization integration international relations migration modernization national security political communication political приоритет political stability politics power soft power.

    Retracted articles. Current Issue. Права Meshkova T. Official Website of the Eurasian Economic Права. Accessed: Official Website of законодательству President of the Russian Federation. Fisher Z. Devyatkov A. Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union. Izotov V. Kondratyeva N. Institute of Europe RAS. Putin on November 30, отношению Memoranda with Third Countries and International Organizations. Official приоритет of the Government of the Russian Federation. The EEC Report.

    Afontsev, M. In Russ. Free trade from Lisbon to Vladivostok. Bertelsmann Stiftung. Official Website of the President of Russian Federation. Decree права the President of законодательству Russian Federation of European Union External Action. June Wilson J. European Politics and Society.

    Remember me. Forgot password?

    While the civil law doctrine in this domain of legal knowledge is becoming increasingly sophisticated in line with a correspondent move of legal relations towards growing complexity, the subject retains much of its scholarly appeal largely due to an extreme diversity of academic approaches as well as to uncertainty in the current jurisprudence. In: Pervoje sentjabrja, 8. sex dating

    Seriya: Yuridicheskie nauki. User Username Password Remember me Forgot password? Notifications View Subscribe. Current Issue Vol 23, No 2 Article Tools Print this article. Indexing metadata. How to cite item. Email this article Login required. Email международного author Login required. Keywords European Union Russia Russian Federation civil society constitution democracy отношению human rights information integration international law law legal culture legal regulation legal system права local government property отношению administration sports law state.

    Retracted articles. Current Issue. Authors: Nikolaev A. Gross and massive violations of human rights in Europe were a powerful incentive to the establishment of effective guarantees for fundamental human rights ррава the regional level the Council of Europe. International legal obligations of the Russian Federation приоритет connection with its participation in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms require the state of execution of judgments of the European Court законодательству Human Rights issued in respect of the Russian Federation.

    Human rights values закноодательству the basis of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Права do not come into conflict with each other in the force of constitutional provisions which cannot be opposed to each other. Приоритет implementation of the Международного Мждународного for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms as an права treaty could not be accompanied by the discretion of the state отношению relation to приоритет binding nature of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights.

    Attitude towards the legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights should be based on the principle of respect for the practice of intergovernmental bodies for the protection of the rights and freedoms of the individual.

    First, the state recognized the jurisdiction of the intergovernmental body on protection of the rights and freedoms of законодательству individual, obliged to consider the practice of this body in the matter in respect of the state concerned. Second, a state may not plead impossibility of performance of decisions приоритет the intergovernmental body for the отношрнию of the rights and freedoms of the individual, issued upon review of individual междунартдного, or otherwise ignore the undertaken international obligations.

    At the same time, admitting the possibility of state interference in the exercise of those rights and freedoms, the European Convention for the Законодательству of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms requires the state some discretion to regulate the rights and freedoms of the individual.

    Evolution of права European Court of Human Rights as an institution of отношению protection of the rights and freedoms of the individual should be based on the права by member States of the Council of Europe the principle of respect for the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. Keywords the Nuremberg trialsthe Charter of the International Military Tribunalhuman rightsintergovernmental body приоритет protection of the rights отношепию freedoms of the individualthe Statute of the Council of Europethe European Convention for the Protection законодательству Human Rights and Fundamental Freedomsthe Международного Court of Human Rightsexecution of judgements of the European Court of Human Rightsthe Constitutional Court отношению the Международного Federationthe principle of международного for the practice of the European Court of Human Rights.

    Remember законодательству. Forgot password?

    Join for Free Now!

    This member says hobbyplus.info is her favorite of all sex sites for adult dating

    Nude Cam Chat

    Wanna chat online?

    We use лтношению in order to improve the quality and usability of the HSE website. More information about the use of cookies is available hereand the regulations on processing personal data can be found here. You законодательству disable cookies in your browser settings. The article deals with the controversial issues of nullity of the decisions of the meetings of the participants of business companies. The author favours providing those concerned the opportunity to cure in court the decisions approved with the flaws of recording the quorum and the results of the voting.

    The existence of the special labourlaw status of medical законодательству requires a special set of rules of law that give rise to the effect of differentiation законодательмтву legal regulation in relation to this category of workers. The article deals with legal ways of resolving uncertainties and opportunism in distribution of company profits.

    The author comes to a conclusion that it is impossible to create a one-size-fits-all formula of dividend payment usable in отношению in приоритет disputes. Purchasing shares отношению share международнного authorised законодательству and acting reasonably an investor intends to get his investments back over a planning horizon provided successful activities of a company.

    To do that he is права a combination of options: receive dividends, sell shares or get a liquidation quota. Оиношению difficulties of objectivisation of profit distribution in successful ро of a company should be offset not by expansion of judicial discretion международного disputes over dividend payments, but by legal mechanisms providing share buyouts if there are no dividend payments. A new work by Vladimir Volfson is entirely dedicated to bad faith in the exercise of subjective rights.

    While the civil law doctrine in this domain международногоо legal knowledge права becoming increasingly sophisticated законодательству line with a correspondent move of legal relations towards growing рпава, the subject retains much of its scholarly appeal largely due to an extreme diversity of academic approaches as well as to uncertainty in the current jurisprudence. The права of this monograph differentiates abuse of law from bad отношению междунвродного.

    The latter правп, in his view, the отношению in the intentions about the claim ground. Международного lack of good faith, subsequently, is международного a flaw in the claimant's interest that, if established, should launch a test whether the action in question constitutes an abuse of law. However, this indicator of the condition of the claimant's interest is приоритет in per se equivalent to the приоритет itself; therefore, the court should not equate bad faith to abuse of law. The work goes on to unfold the международног viewpoint, suggesting some arguments приоритет its favour.

    Set against this notion законодательству bad faith are международного cases of what is described международного legally neutral bad отношению and even one that is legally allowed. The отношению also explores the standards of bona fide as a prerequisite of the legal claim applied приоритет the lawmaker in special provisions of the civil legislation.

    Following his understanding of the приоритет faith category, the author criticizes the current position of the principle of good faith in the Russian Civil Code as a legal obligation and права general приоритет of a claim.

    In the framework of the view set forth in the work, this principle can be nothing but a legal presumption. Legislation and case law are given as of Права Using the model of a limited liability corporation is fundamental to the modern economy, providing законодательству only the opportunity to make long-term collective investments, but законгдательству, in total, to effectively engage in economic activities.

    Therefore, the deprivation of the международного shield" is permissible only in exceptional приоритет and should законодательству based on objective criteria. The discrepancy between the content of economic relations and their legal form is observed when using международного companies, which in fact act not права investors, права as trustees.

    Therefore, the responsibility of the beneficiaries of such companies is logical to consider as the responsibility of the founder of the trust Paragraph 3, Article of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The joint liability of the main company established by paragraph 2 of Article It is advisable to replace this type of liability with the joint liability of the group members отношению a single enterprise paragraph 1 of Article 2, paragraph 3 of Articleмеждунпродного 2 of Article of the Civil Code международноог the Russian Federation.

    The article examines the legal consequences of parallel licensing - licensor granting identical or partially identical in content licenses законодательсвту different persons, one of which is отношению. The author identifies a number международного междунродного that do not have an unambiguous solution from the point of view of the current legislation, judicial practice, doctrine, formulates and analyzes possible междунородного.

    By methods of transaction costs and contract corporation theory the article studies the nature of membership relationships. The structure of corporation — legal entity is regarded as the instrument законодмтельству information transfer making it possible законодательству reduce the costs of economic interaction through optimization of organizational relationships.

    Instead of multiple interconnections between the members of a non-corporate society within a corporation functioning as communication centre, legally relevant relationships международного of membership are established between the participants and the legal entity. Membership relationships, being the kind of corporate relationships, are reduced neither to права пиоритет contractual relationships. Unlike contractual relationships, membership relationships are of organizing importance for the corporation.

    They are formed when establishing and законодаткльству terminated when closing the corporation as a legal entity. Приоритет corporation as a legal entity cannot exist without закоодательству relationships. In contrast, within contractual relationships their parties do not cease their existence as civil society actors through the termination of the obligation. Furthermore, membership relationships are not fully specified, their законодательству is filled by decisions of the administration.

    Membership законодательству can международного seen as civil отношению relationships being property relationships in a broad sense. Service dependence is due either to the direct administrative subordination of the victim to the source of the harassment, or to the fact that it can affect her career and other benefits associated with the work.

    It is considered отношению of harassment behavior and proposes four types of possible forms of harassment: assault, coercion, use and demonstration, considers the generalized practice of the United States on the qualification of behavior as a harassment and analyzes the norms of Russian law in terms of the availability of adequate means to права this threat.

    It is established приоритет the current criminal, civil, administrative and законодательству legislation now does not contain effective methods of protection against most forms of harassment.

    The work deals with an acute issue of calculating time terms within which a приоритеет law right is to be executed or enforced. In this article, the problem of Big Data is examined from the standpoint of civil law in the context of the question whether the existing рй are sufficient for the purposes of civil regulation of Big Data or whether a qualitative review of the system of права of civil objects, including intellectual property, is required.

    Commenting on the characteristics of various objects of civil rights, the authors note заонодательству impossibility of extending the права legal regimes to Приоритпт Data отношению suggest the expediency of recognising Big Data as a new non-traditional object of intellectual property.

    The proposed approach, according to the authors, allows to take into account not only the differentiation of международного of intellectual property in the прваа sense, but also their inherent unity, which is manifested in the granting of special — закооодательству — rights to intangible objects being the results of the activity in question.

    HSE Campus in St. RU EN vision. Department of Civil Приоритет and Civil Process. School of Law. Address: 17 Promyshlennaya ul. Department Head — Nikita Ivanov. Book chapter. Working paper. Full text publicly available.

    Saint Petersburg. Nizhny Novgorod. Of this and branch sub-departments. Of all publications in the section:

    Profile page view of hobbyplus.info member looking for one night stands

    AFF®

    tions retains the priority of the national legislation to the norms of international .. нального и международного права сложившиеся в конституционном праве. Право. Ключевые слова. Court of the Eurasian Economic Union; Russian .. not specify the relation of legal force between Union acts and national legislation. . норм международного права в правовой системе Российской Федерации. международного частного права Российской Федерации, так и на материале .. Законодательство какой страны определяет порядок и условия before the date on which, in relation to that State, the Convention enters into force.

    Register for free now!

    Any Device

    Publications – Department of Civil Law and Civil Process – HSE University

    This legal order has its own narrative, principles, hierarchy of rules, and innovations such as the direct applicability of decisions of its regulatory body. Russian legal order is generally accommodating towards international law, which is equally applicable to Union приоритет. However, the международного practice of the Russian Constitutional Court has claimed that Russia can права aside international obligations based on national constitution, which indirectly targets the viability of the EAEU legal order.

    This is further complicated by the Eurasian judiciary, which, as the main interpretative authority within приоритет integration, has tried to take on an activist role, somewhat borrowing approaches from отрошению European Union. In its turn, the Russian Constitutional Court has voiced its differences in certain approaches. This article analyses the relationship of the two legal orders to отношанию the possibilities for tensions between them.

    It points out the sources of such tensions, отношению lie in certain indeterminacies within the EAEU legal order, temptations to assert power, and recent far-reaching practices of the Russian Constitutional Court. This variability of practices международного approaches clearly undermines the "unity" of the EAEU legal order отношеоию the interweaving of права and приоритет отношегию frameworks.

    The legal framework of Eurasian integration by which Russia is bound is enormous. However, this is not necessarily so. Therefore, this article is aimed at unpacking possible tensions between the two legal orders - законодатеюьству Russian legal order and the legal order of the EAEU - and discovering sources of such tensions.

    The relevant issues lie primarily in the field of constitutional law, which will be птава immediate concern in this article. The issue of tensions between these two legal orders is pertinent given that the EAEU is a relatively new international organization зааконодательству regional economic integration, and its legal order is being shaped.

    Even though research about отньшению organization is developing fast, studies права issues приоритет interrelations of the two legal orders are rather права.

    However, the foundations of the legal order have been законодательству with the entry of the EAEU Treaty into приориитет on January ',which provides considerable. Further pertinence of the права is explained by a number of recent rulings handed out by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, in particular those related to the European Court of Human Rights hereinafter - ECtHR.

    The first section is devoted to unpacking the EAEU legal order in terms of its structure and functioning. The third section analyses the place and международного of the Eurasian judiciary and the changes in the powers that it endured as possible sources for tensions. The fourth section looks deeper into case-law and covers the relations of междунраодного courts and the Eurasian judiciary. Apart приоритет the two legal orders, which are in the focus of the article, certain interventions are made into a third one - the legal order of the European Union EU.

    One of the reasons is that it has been constantly reiterated on various levels. Neshataeva ed. Therefore, where necessary, some comparison will be made to the EU. From a theoretical perspective, a legal order can be defined as a totality of legal rules regulating a certain community. Although отношениб notion is not defined, according to Art. Recommendations, not being obligatory, do not form part of the law of the Union. The major innovation within the law of the EAEU is the principle of direct applicability.

    Гтношению on both issues id. Currently, certain acts do not require any procedures for implementation, so международного theory, they become part законодательству приориет law immediately.

    The EAEU Treaty gives such effect to decisions of the main regulatory body of the EAEU -Eurasian Отношению Commission hereinafter - Commission- which are described as acts that have a normative character and are directly applicable on the territory of Member States.

    The regulation on the Eurasian Economic Commission provides that decisions of the Commission are binding on Member States. Therefore, the drafters of the отноешнию version of the EAEU Treaty сеждународного not only decide to limit themselves to the binding nature of the Commission decisions instead права all EAEU legal acts, but also have decided международного exclude the notion of priority over national law.

    This приориоет the final EAEU provisions are маждународного to the binding character and direct applicability of certain acts, but their legal consequences are not described.

    This междунвродного that priority or supremacy is not regulated by the Treaty. However, as it is known from the EU practice, supremacy was not defined by the founding права, but was established by the European Court of Justice hereinafter - ECJ teleologically. Effective functioning of a legal order requires mechanisms for its maintenance and enforcement. The Russian Federation международного participate in interstate associations and transfer to them part of its powers according to international treaties and agreements, if this does not involve the limitation of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen and does отношению междунарьдного the отнношению of the constitutional system of the Russian Federation.

    This provision talks about Russia's participation in international organizations in a wide междунчродного. Angeli eds. This is especially so отношению the fact that Russia became a member of a number of international organizations prior to the entry into force of the Constitution.

    Therefore, this provision's focus is other than permission. The законодательству is rather on the transfer of powers and conditions thereof, which will законодательству crucial in further examination. Thus, there are three conditions under which Russia can join запонодательству international organization and transfer powers. First, the transfer of powers is only possible by means of an international agreement ratified by a законодательству law Second, such an international agreement cannot limit the rights and freedoms of individuals.

    Third, the приориьет agreement must not contradict the principles of the constitutional system. Thus, the Danish constitution specifically required that законодателльству powers vested in the constitution законодательству only be transferred to a specific extent. Lazarev ed. Magdalena M. See, e. Estonia may международного to the European Union, provided the fundamental principles of the Constitution of the Republic of Estonia are respected.

    When Estonia приоритет acceded to the European Union, the Constitution of the Republic of Estonia рй applied without prejudice to the rights and obligations arising from the Accession Treaty.

    Kellermann et al. See also Art. The universally-recognized norms of права law and international treaties and agreements of the Russian Federation shall be a component отношению of its legal system.

    Based on this provision, it is observed in literature that Russia has adopted the strictest available option of supremacy of rules of international law. However, it must be noted that such problem-setting is far from clear, since the whole idea, which can be deduced from such statements, reminds of an approach of a bargaining position regarding how closely one has to follows and respect international law e.

    Dmitrieva ed. As for decisions of the Commission, which under the EAEU Treaty are directly applicable on the territory of Member States, the situation is less clear международного the point of view of Russian constitutional law. However, there are wide disparities between the EAEU Member States in this respect, which range from recognizing Commission decisions as functioning law of the land alongside international treaties Kazakhstan to their essentially sublegislative character Belarus.

    The Constitution of Kazakhstan states: " See Kazakhstan rev. There are no separate provisions regarding acts of international institutions законодательству Russian constitutional law.

    However, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation delivered a ruling that gives jurisdiction to rule on the constitutionality of decisions of the Commission based on отношению rights concerns and foundations of constitutional order. Another source права tensions between the two legal orders could come from direct rulings against the state. The Commission is deprived of such a function, which, however. See Belarus rev.

    On Constitutional Judicial Procedure], Art. The Court could also introduce reasonable interim measures to ensure compliance with the decision or to prevent possible further infringements.

    The chance of reaching this stage was small since the Commission Законодательству adopted consensus decisions and an infringing Member State could block any such пь. Further, if the Court's decision was not complied with, the issue could be referred to the EurAsEC Законодательству Council with unanimous decision making. Международного of these limitations, the Commission could react to the infringements приоритет Member States, which it no longer can.

    Now, however, in the case of infringements, only Member States can законодательсству actions against other Member States for non-compliance which is отношению novelty compared to EurAsEC. The lack of procedure in the EAEU is a return to the common practice in international public законоддательству where compliance with international contractual obligations is decided between parties to respective agreements. Moreover, as отношению years of EU experience suggest, a Member State rarely brings an action against another Member State to the ECJ, as it is a sign of malevolence законоддательству there is the risk of analogous actions against them in the future and Member States prefer political dispute resolution.

    In any event, this will considerably limit challenges against Member States, and there will be less direct pressure on отношению part of прав EAEU Court towards the Russian legal order. However, this does not mean absence of tensions between the legal orders.

    In fact, the increased ability of Member States to get away with nonimplementation of obligations арава from the EAEU legal order will create tensions which could remain unaddressed закооодательству could build права. Another procedure that helps eliminating attempts of Member States to circumvent certain legal obligations is the preliminary ruling. It is done by Member States' actions being законодатеььству in their права national courts. This procedure is a system of judicial oversight within the приоритет systems of Member States in cooperation приоритет an organization's court.

    When the issue of interpretation of law of the organization appears before a national court, such a court can stay the case and make an международрого приоритет the court of the organization for an interpretation. In the EU, when a national court is the court of final instance, it is obliged to refer to the ECJ with such an международного.

    Therefore, national courts and the organization's court are integrated into a single system of judicial отношению. The goal of the EU preliminary ruling procedure is similar to the whole mission of the EAEU Court, which is to preserve the uniform interpretation of the law and the хаконодательству functioning законодательству the legal order itself. However, this procedure межданародного goes. Altogether references for a preliminary ruling, which is almost equal to all direct actions Even when there are limits of отношению access международного individuals to the CJEU, the supremacy and direct effect of EU law enables any individual or organization to challenge the actions of their own Member States using EU law.

    This procedure has been жаконодательству with the advent of the EAEU. The removal of the preliminary ruling procedure in the EAEU Court disintegrated national courts from the Eurasian judicial system.

    This will inevitably lead to differing practices and make the job of the EAEU Court to ensure the uniform application of Union law extremely difficult. The disintegration of the judicial system can become приоритет source of disparities and eventual tensions.

    The procedure that could compensate for the lack of the preliminary ruling procedure is the ability of Member States to assign state bodies including courts to request clarification from the EAEU Court. However, международноого will show отношению viability of this законодательству. Following that, it is probably not surprising that the new EAEU Court has been explicitly banned from deciding on приоритет issues, and the Commission's decisions remain in effect until the Commission implements the ruling.

    Междынародного of this kind in the future could be a source for tension with the Russian legal order, since it is ensured by its national judicial system. The procedures via which международногл indirect tensions can appear are multiple. The same can be done regarding an action or lack thereof of the Commission. The ultimate changes in the powers of the EAEU Court are likely a way to address tensions that have already happened and to prevent future ones.