Search

В статье с использованием сравнительно-правовой методологии исследуется апелляционное производство в уголовном процессе Германии. Особое внимание обращено на законодательную технику германского уголовно-процессуального уложения (УПК ФРГ, StPO), благодаря которой устанавливается стандарт исследования обстоятельств уголовного дела. В работе представлен анализ судебного механизма выявления и устранения (элиминации) судебных ошибок. Оцениваются особенности доказывания и представления новых доказательств в суде апелляционной инстанции. Изложено доктринальное и практическое значение легально закрепленного принципа материальной истины (§ 244 II StPO). Рассмотрена обязанность суда по своей инициативе собирать новые доказательства по делу (Aufklдrungspflicht). Изучены особенности применения принципа свободной оценки доказательств на основе полного, всестороннего и объективного исследования (§ 261 StPO). На основе проведенного исследования выдвигается гипотеза о пригодности немецкого опыта для решения проблем отечественного правового регулирования апелляции. В частности, формулируется вывод о возможности построения в России модели классической (полной) апелляции, позволяющей беспрепятственно приобщать новые доказательства, что также позволит отказаться от концепции дополнительных материалов по статье 389.13 УПК РФ. Система выводов, построенная в результате исследования, основана непосредственного на обширном анализе и оценке оригинальных доктринальных источников, судебной практики и законодательства ФРГ, благодаря чему удалось как расширить область отечественного юридического знания в сфере уголовного судопроизводства, так и подготовить значимые предложения по реформированию отдельных правовых институтов, в частности апелляционного производства, избежав при этом необоснованной рецепции зарубежного права и опыта его применения., The article, using a comparative legal methodology, researches appeal proceedings in German criminal procedure. Special attention is paid to the legislative technique of the German criminal procedure code, which ensured the establishment of a standard for investigating circumstances. The judicial mechanism for the elimination of justice miscarriages is analyzed. Special aspects of proving and introduction of new evidences in appellate court are estimating. The meaning of the legally established principle of material truth is stated (§ 244 II StPO). The obligation of the court ex officio to gather new evidences is analyzed. The principle of free assessment of evidence is explored. Based on the research, the hypothesis is put forward about the availability of German experience for solving problems of domestic legal regulation of appeals. In particular, it concludes that it is possible to build a model of the classic appeal in Russia, allowing to freely introducing new evidence, which will also make it possible to abandon the concept of additional materials under the Article 389.13 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. The research result is based directly on an extensive analysis and evaluation of the original doctrinal sources, case law and legislation of the Federal Republic of Germany. The research is allowed to expand the field of domestic legal knowledge in the scope of criminal proceedings, as well as prepared the significant proposals for the reform of certain legal institutions, in particular appeal proceedings, avoiding unreasonable reception of foreign law and experience., Бизнес. Образование. Право, Выпуск 3 (52) 2020

La presente tesi persegue l’obiettivo di chiarire la portata e l’incisività della del divieto di nova in appello, rectius dell’interdizione a dedurre nuove prove. La necessità di questo chiarimento discende dalla rilevanza pratica della questione, dall'intervento di molteplici riforme e dalla complessità del dato normativo. Considerato che il divieto di nova può essere concepito come una vera e propria decadenza, l’approccio che si suggerisce è quello di valorizzare il ruolo assunto dal fenomeno preclusivo all'interno del processo. La ricerca muove i propri passi da una rilettura delle teorie chiovendiane di preclusione al fine di valorizzare l’evoluzione normativa ed interpretativa subita dal fenomeno; in un secondo momento, individuati i tratti essenziali di ciascuna fonte preclusiva, si è ricondotta la disciplina dei nova ad un’ipotesi di preclusione da tardività. Questa specificazione contribuisce a identificare il significato di “novità” del mezzo istruttorio chiarendo la differenza tra la prova “nuova” e quella “non nuova”. Successivamente, dagli esiti della ricerca è emerso che, mentre le prove “nuove” sono assoggettate al divieto di novum probatorio, quelle “non nuove” sono anch'esse interdette, ma dall'operatività di differenti fonti preclusive. Infine, all'interno della fattispecie della prova “nuova”, si è delineata l’esistenza della sottocategoria delle prove “nuove, ma non tardive” che sono liberamente introducibili in grado d’appello. Tornando, invece, alle prove “nuove” soggette a decadenza, la parte conclusiva dell’analisi dell’ordinamento domestico si è concentrata sulle deroghe alla preclusione; nello specifico, adottata una concezione permissiva di novità, si è suggerita una rivisitazione della portata delle singole eccezioni al divieto. Al di là delle specifiche ipotesi dei giuramenti, si è optato – da un lato – per una concezione oggettiva, ma relativa, della deroga della rimessione in termini e – dall'altro – per una lettura restrittiva della deroga della prova indispensabile. L’ultima parte della tesi si sofferma, invece, sull'ordinamento francese per addivenire a talune conclusioni comparatistiche. L’appello francese, sebbene costituisca un’impugnazione similare a quella italiana, gode della particolarità di essere una voie d'achèvement, uno strumento di completamento e definizione della lite. Come emerso, tale caratteristica discende soprattutto dal peculiare atteggiarsi dell’effetto devolutivo nella disciplina del gravame; all'esito dell’analisi, si è concluso che l'appel è caratterizzato dall'assenza del divieto di nova e da una completa apertura a nuove prove. Tali caratteristiche non devono, però, ingannare l’interprete: la differenza non discende da una specifica transigenza del legislatore francese, ma da una diversità più radicata che si fonda su principi estranei all'ordinamento italiano. The aim of this thesis is to illustrate the effectiveness of the rules of divieto di nova and the ban of new defences before the court of appeal; in particular, this research focuses on the prohibition of new evidence. The need to clarify this issue depends on its practical relevance, on the various reforms and on the complexity of the law. This prohibition can be considered a procedural time limit, so the suggested approach enhances the role played by the general category of loss of procedural rights. The research opens with a review of Chiovenda’s theories, in order to highlight the legislative and interpretative evolutions of the phenomenon; after the identification of the main characteristics of each case of loss of right, the nova interdiction is compared to a loss of right due to delay in presenting the evidence. This specification helps to identify the meaning of “novelty” of the proof and, therefore, it clarifies the difference between the “new” and the “not-new” evidence. The results of this research show that, while the “new” proof is subjected to the nova prohibition, the “not-new” are also generally forbidden because of other cases of loss of right. Finally, in the category of “new” proof, it is possible to identify the sub-category of “nuove ma non tardive” evidence that can be used before the court of appeal. Looking back at the “new” evidence, the final part of the domestic order analysis focuses on derogations from loss of right; more specifically, adopted a permissive concept of “novelty”, it is suggested to rethink the extensiveness of the single exceptions of the ban. Beyond the specific cases of oath, I opted for an objective but relative conception of the relief from time-limits derogation and – on the other hand – for a restrictive interpretation of the exemption of the essential proof. The last part of the thesis deal with the French system in order to provide some comparative considerations. Although the French appeal resembles the Italian one, it has the unique characteristic of being a voie d'achèvement, an instrument of dispute completion and finalisation. As emerged, this quality is a consequence of the devolutive effect of the appeal. At the end of the analysis, I concluded that the appel is characterised by the lack of the divieto di nova and a complete openness to new evidence. In any case, these features should not deceive the interpreter: this distinction does not depend on a transigence of the French legislator, but on a deep-rooted difference that derives from general principles.

This paper analyses the pre-tax inequality in the income that individuals actually receive in Brazil and the role of the personal income tax in regulating these incomes. We produce a new distributional series of fiscal income, consistently combining annual and nationally representative household survey data with detailed information on income tax declarations recently released by the Brazilian Federal Tax Office. Our results provide a sharp upward revision of the official estimates of inequality in Brazil but maintain the decreasing inequality trends, even though they are less pronounced than previously measured. The exceptionally large concentration of income at the top is noteworthy, as is its relative stability over time. The income share of the wealthiest 10 per cent of the population fell from 54.6 per cent to 53.0 per cent of pre-tax fiscal income between 2001 and 2015, while the share of the poorest 50 per cent of the population rose from 10.6 per cent to 12.6 per cent. Brazil's squeezed middle 40 per cent of the distribution experienced a slight drop in its share, from 34.8 per cent to 34.4 per cent. Despite strong average income growth, the poorest 50 per cent only made moderate gains, which came at the expense of smaller shares for the middle and the top. Over the short to medium term, it is the level of average income of the bottom that matters more than its growth. We show that the role of the personal income tax in regulating incomes in Brazil is very limited, because the majority of the income of elites in Brazil is not subject to the tax. This explains the lower effective tax liability that is observed for upper income groups and illustrates that the personal income tax is not a progressive policy tool in Brazil, violating the principles of horizontal equity and vertical equity. This motivates the creation of a simplified and comprehensive personal income tax that would incorporate all income categories along a single or dual tax regime. [...]

U građanskoj parnici efikasnost sudovanja postiže se, između ostalog, i zabranom iznošenja novih činjenica i dokaza, osim pod izuzetnim, zakonom propisanim uslovima. Arbitražni postupak posvećen je efikasnosti barem koliko i sudski, no u arbitražnim zakonima i konvencijama gotovo se nikada ne nalaze odredbe kojima se uređuje pitanje novota u postupcima kontrole sudskih odluka (poništaj i priznanje van zemlje porekla). Rad pokušava da sagleda moguće načine koncipiranja delovanja ograničenja beneficium novorum u takvim postupcima. Zamisliva su različita rešenja, počev od analogne primene pravila koja važe u domaćem postupku po redovnim ili vanrednim pravnim lekovima pa sve do različitih alternativnih, sui generis rešenja., Litigation strives toward efficiency by introducing inter alia restrictions on introducing new facts and evidence once the judgment has been rendered. Such new facts and evidence are impermissible, save in the presence of exceptional circumstances expressly provided in law. Arbitration proceedings are geared toward efficiency at least as much as litigation. However, legislation governing arbitration and international conventions seldom – if ever – contain rules on admissibility of new facts and evidence in the setting aside and recognition proceedings. This paper attempts to flesh out possible approaches to constraining of beneficium novorum in those proceedings. There is a number of conceivable solutions, such as analogous application of the rules applicable in the context of domestic legal remedies in civil proceedings (both ‘ordinary’ and ‘extraordinary’ remedies), alternative (sui generis) solutions, etc.

Final sentencing in a criminal trial cannot in principle be questioned any more. Indeed the adjudged case has to be considered as definitely settled. The non bis in idem Latin saw and the res judicata tenet thus seem to preclude the re-opening of a criminal trial. And yet, lawgivers put in place two distinct legal processes that enable French citizens to challenge their sentencing: reviewing and re-hearing. The conditions for carrying out these processes and their own specifities make these proceedings quite exceptional. Through the presentation of new evidence for reviewing, and because re-hearing can be considered as of right, convicted people may in some cases get a new trial. Nevertheless only an ad hoc jurisdiction can decide upon a new hearing and the latter will be of a different kind depending on the new trial at hand. Moreover, the upshot of this new trial will make it possible either to maintain the sentencing notwithstanding new evidence being presented to a new court or to declare the defendant not guilty.; Une condamnation pénale définitive ne peut en principe plus être remise en cause. La chose jugée doit en effet être tenue pour vraie. L’adage non bis in idem et les principes de l’autorité et de la force de la chose jugée semblent dès lors interdire de rouvrir le procès pénal. Toutefois, le législateur français prévoit deux procédures distinctes permettant de remettre encause la condamnation prononcée : la révision et le réexamen. Les conditions de mise en oeuvre de ces procédures et leurs spécificités en font des procédures très exceptionnelles. Par la présentation d’éléments nouveaux de fait pour la révision, et de droit pour le réexamen, le requérant peut dans certains cas prétendre à nouvelle étude de son affaire. Cependant cette réouverture ne pourra être décidée que par une juridiction ad hoc et sera de type différent selon le nouveau procès envisagé. De plus, l’issue de ce nouveau procès pourra permettre de maintenir la condamnation en dépit des nouveaux faits présentés ou reconnaître l’innocence du condamné.

El artículo analiza la revisión de las sentencias condenatorias firmes, restringiéndose principalmente a la causal letra d) del artículo 473 del Código Procesal Penal. Sobre la base tanto de un estudio conceptual relativo a la regulación legal vigente, como empírico a la luz de la aplicación de la disposición que se comenta, los autores dan cuenta de dos tipos generales de problemas: de diseño legislativo y de interpretación jurisprudencial. Se destaca la necesidad de diferenciar adecuadamente los requisitos que hacen procedente la acción de revisión, proponiéndose cual debe ser la interpretación correcta. The article analyzes the wrongful conviction claim, primarily the provision letter d) article 473 of the Chilean Code of Criminal Procedure. On the basis of a conceptual study concerning the current legal regulation, and a empirical study in light of the application of the provision discussed, the authors account for two general kinds of problems: of legislative design and judicial interpretation. It stresses the need to properly differentiate the requirements of the wrongful conviction procedure, proposing an interpretation that should be deemed correct.

Objective: To update evidence for available therapies in the treatment of hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) and to examine whether research evidence has changed from 31 January 2006 to 31 January 2009. Methods: A systematic literature search was undertaken using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, Science Citation Index and the Cochrane Library. The quality of studies was assessed. Effect sizes (ESs) and numbers needed to treat were calculated for efficacy. Relative risks, hazard ratios (HRs) or odds ratios were estimated for side effects. Publication bias and heterogeneity were examined. Sensitivity analysis was undertaken to compare the evidence pooled in different years and different qualities. Cumulative meta-analysis was used to examine the stability of evidence. Results: Sixty-four systematic reviews. 266 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 21 new economic evaluations (EEs) were published between 2006 and 2009. Of 51 treatment modalities, new data on efficacy have been published for more than half (26/39, 67%) of those for which research evidence was available in 2006. Among non-pharmacological therapies, ES for pain relief was unchanged for self-management, education, exercise and acupuncture. However, with new evidence the ES for pain relief for weight reduction reached statistical significance, increasing from 0.13 [95% confidence interval (Cl) -0.12, 0.36] in 2006 to 0.20 (95% Cl 0.00, 0.39) in 2009. By contrast, the ES for electromagnetic therapy which was large in 2006 (ES = 0.77, 95% Cl 0.36, 1.17) was no longer significant (ES = 0.16, 95% Cl -0.08, 0.39). Among pharmacological therapies, the cumulative evidence for the benefits and harms of oral and topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, diacerhein and intra-articular (IA) corticosteroid was not greatly changed. The ES for pain relief with acetaminophen diminished numerically, but not significantly, from 0.21 (0.02, 0.41) to 0.14 (0.05, 0.22) and was no longer significant when analysis was restricted to high quality trials (ES = 0.10, 95% Cl -0.0, 0.23). New evidence for increased risks of hospitalisation due to perforation, peptic ulceration and bleeding with acetaminophen >3 g/day have been published (HR = 1.20, 95% Cl 1.03, 1.40). ES for pain relief from IA hyaluronic acid, glucosamine sulphate, chondroitin sulphate and avocado soybean unsponifiables also diminished and there was greater heterogeneity of outcomes and more evidence of publication bias. Among surgical treatments further negative RCTs of lavage/debridement were published and the pooled results demonstrated that benefits from this modality of therapy were no greater than those obtained from placebo. Conclusion: Publication of a large amount of new research evidence has resulted in changes in the calculated risk-benefit ratio for some treatments for OA. Regular updating of research evidence can help to guide best clinical practice. (C) 2010 Osteoarthritis Research Society International. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.