Presumptions on Discretion in Law Enforcement of Financial Legal Provisions

• Authors: Anna Barikova

Abstracts

EN

The author has outlined the essence of legal presumptions on discretion in law enforcement of financial legal provisions as both current legal phenomena and legal regulations. The relationship between presumptions and principles of law, as well as the classification of presumptions has been researched into. Presumptions on discretion in law enforcement of financial legal provisions are formed in relation to a particular legal fact or group of facts or compositions that correspond with a particular law enforcement situation, which is due to the origin, content and purpose of these facts or compositions, the relationship between them. With regard to discretion in law enforcement of financial legal provisions, it could also be argued that there are both legally defined irrefutable presumptions (innocence, “all doubts in favour of the taxpayer”) and rebuttable in a particular case, which does not terminate its effect as a whole. It has been concluded that presumptions on discretion in law enforcement of financial legal provisions are applied due to logical methods of induction or modelling, when the probability of a phenomenon is not high enough.

Keywords

EN

legal framework; legal regulations; functions of law; legal interpretation; evaluation; atypical regulations

• Publisher: Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek
• Journal: Krakowskie Studia Małopolskie
• Year: 2021
• Volume: 2(30)
• Pages: 7-24

Dates

published

2021

Contributors

author

Anna Barikova

• National Academy of Internal Affairs

References

• Abramovich, A.Ya., Afanaseva, G.A., Barsanov, G.P., et al. (1985), Slovar inostrannyh slov [Dictionary of foreign words], Moscow: Russkij ya¬zyk. [in Russian].
• Babaev, V.K. (1974), Prezumpcii v sovetskom prave [Presumptions in So¬viet law]: tutorial. Gorkij: Gorkij Higher School of the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs. [in Russian].
• Babaev, V.K. (2000), Prezumpcii v rossijskom prave i yuridicheskoj prak¬tike. Problemy yuridicheskoj tehniki [Presumptions in Russian law and legal practice. Problems of legal technique], pp. 323–330. [in Rus¬sian].
• Barcelo, J.J. (2009), Burden of Proof, Prima Facie Case and Presump¬tion in WTO Dispute Settlement. Cornell International Law Journal, vol. 42, pp. 23–43.
• Bartoshek, M. (1989), Rimskoe pravo: (ponyatiya, terminy, opredele¬niya) [Roman law: (concepts, terms, definitions)], Moscow: Yurid. lit. [in Russian].
• Bot, A.G. (2015), Opinion of in C-605/13P Anbouba, ECLI:EU:C:2015:2, OJ, C 205/6, para. 50.
• Boyle, С., MacCrimmon, М.-Т., Martin, D. (1999), The law of evidence: fact finding, fairness, and advocacy. Toronto: Emond Montgomery.
• Chernilovskij, Z.M. (1984), Prezumpcii i fikcii v istorii prava. Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i pravo [Presumptions and fictions in the history of law. Soviet state and law], no. 1, pp. 98–105. [in Russian].
• Cukanov, N.N. (2001), Pravovye prezumpcii v administrativnoj deyatel¬nosti milicii [Legal presumptions in the administrative activities of the police], PhD thesis, Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federa¬tion. Omsk Academy, Omsk. [in Russian].
• Davydova, M.L. (2009), Yuridicheskaya tehnika: problemy teorii i metodologii [Legal technique: problems of theory and methodology]: monograph. Volgograd: Volgograd State University Publishing House. [in Russian].
• Dormidontov, G.F. (1895), Klassifikaciya yavlenij yuridicheskogo byta, otnosimyh k sluchayam primeneniya fikcij. Yuridicheskie fikcii i pr¬ezumpcii: ch. 1. [Classification of phenomena of legal life related to the use of fiction. Legal fictions and presumptions: part 1]. Kazan: Typolithography of the Imperial University. [in Russian].
• ECHR: Case of Allenet de Ribemont v. France, Judgment of 10 February 1995, Retrieved from: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-57914.
• Fedotov, A.V. (2002), Ispolzovanie ocenochnyh prezumpcij v processe dokazyvaniya. Zhurnal rossijskogo prava [The use of estimated pre¬sumptions in the process of evidence. Journal of Russian law], no. 5, pp. 87–96. [in Russian].
• Gudz, D.S. (2005), Spivvidnoshennia pravovoi prezumptsii zi sporidne¬nymy pravovymy katehoriiamy. Aktualni problemy derzhavy i prava [Correlation of legal presumption with related legal categories. Cur¬rent issues of state and law], iss. 25, pp. 109–113. [in Ukrainian].
• James, B. (1889), Thayer Presumptions and the Law of Evidence. Har¬vard Law Review, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 141–166.
• Kalinovskij, K.B. (2006), Otgranichenie pravovyh prezumpcij ot obos¬novaniya yuridicheskih norm [Distinguishing legal presumptions from substantiation of legal norms], Proceedings of the international sci¬entific-practical conference, pp. 60–62. [in Russian].
• Karanina, N.S. (2006), Pravovye prezumpcii v teorii prava i rossijskom zakonodatelstve [Legal presumptions in the theory of law and Rus¬sian legislation], PhD thesis, Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow. [in Russian].
• Kardanec, A.V. (2002), Preyudiciya v rossijskom prave. Problemy teorii i praktiki [Prejudice in the Russian law. Problems of theory and prac¬tice], PhD thesis, Nizhnij Novgorod Academy, Nizhnij Novgorod. [in Russian].
• Liashenko, R.D. (2011), Prezumptsii u pravi: pytannia teorii ta praktyky [Presumptions in the law: issues of theory and practice], PhD thesis, M.P. Drahomanov National Pedagogical University, Kyiv. [in Ukrai¬nian].
• Liashenko, R.D., Vlasiuk, M.V. (2013), Prezumptsiia zakonnosti sudovohorishennia. Visnyk Zaporizkoho natsionalnoho universytetu [Presump¬tion of lawfulness of a court decision. Zaporizhzhia National Univer¬sity Bulletin], no. 3, p. 19–24. [in Ukrainian].
• Mendoza, J.D. (2005), La prueba en el proceso civil [The proof in civil proceedings]. Justicia y derecho, vol. 5, pp. 49–67. [in Spanish].
• Moglen, E. (1991). Legal Fictions and Common Law Legal Theory: Some Historical Reflections. Tel-Aviv University Studies in Law, no. 10, pp. 33–52.
• Movellan, S.A. (2007), La prueba por presunciones. Particular referenda a su aplicacion judicial en supuestos de responsabilid [The test by presumptions. Particular reference to its judicial application in cases of liability]. Granada: Comares | editorial. [in Spanish].
• Petruhin, I.L. (1973), Prezumpcii i preyudicii v dokazyvanii [Presumptions and prejudices in proof]. In Teoriya dokazatelstv v sovetskom ugo¬lovnom processe [Theory of evidence in the Soviet criminal process]. Moscow: Yurid. lit. [in Russian].
• Petruhin, I.L. (1973), Prezumpcii i preyudicii v dokazyvanii [Presump¬tions and prejudices in proof]. In Teoriya dokazatelstv v sovetskom ugolovnom processe [Evidence theory in Soviet criminal procedure]. Moscow: Yurid. lit. [in Russian].
• Prakken, H., Sartor, G. (2008), More on Presumptions and Burdens of Proof, Proceedings of the 19th annual conference on legal knowledge and information systems (JURIX), pp. 176–185.
• Reshetnikova, I.V. (1999), Dokazatelstvennoe pravo Anglii i SShA [Proof law of England and USA]. Moscow: Gorodec. [in Russian].
• Resolution of the Supreme Court of 25 April 2018 in case no. 815 /3989/17, Retrieved from: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Re-view/73700740. [in Ukrainian].
• Resolution of the Supreme Court of 26 March 2020 in the case no. 825/1700/18, Retrieved from: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Re-view/88431170. [in Ukrainian].
• Resolution of the Supreme Court of 17 February 2021 in case no. 580/3469/19, Retrieved from: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Re-view/95240811. [in Ukrainian].
• Sandevuar, P. (1994), Vvedenie v pravo [Introduction to Law]. Moscow: Intratek-R. [in Russian].
• Sandevuar, P. (1994), Vvedenie v pravo [Introduction to Law]. Moscow: Intratek-R. [in Russian]..
• Shahkeldov, F.G. (2005), Prezumpcii, aksiomy i gipotezy v prave. Teoriya i praktika obshestvennogo razvitiya [Presumptions, axioms and hy¬potheses in law. Theory and practice of social development], no. 3, pp. 54–56. [in Russian].
• Sukhanova, D.S. (2010), Mizhnarodno-pravovi ta natsionalno-pravovi pr¬ezumptsii u sferi prav i svobod liudyny ta hromadianyna: porivnialno-pravovyi aspekt [International legal and national legal presumptions in the area of human and civil rights and freedoms: comparative legal aspect], PhD thesis synopsis, International Humanitarian University. Odesa. [in Ukrainian].
• Suprun, T.M. (2013), Pravovi prezumptsii ta sumizhni poniattia. Biuleten Ministerstva yustytsii Ukrainy [Legal presumptions and related con¬cepts. Bulletin of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine], no. 2, pp. 125– 132. [in Ukrainian].
• Tax Code of Ukraine: Law of Ukraine of 2 December 2010 no. 2755-VI. Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy – Bulletin of Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. Kyiv: Parlam. vyd-vo. [in Ukrainian].
• The Constitution of Ukraine: Law of Ukraine of 28 June 1996 no. 254к /96-ВР. Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy – Bulletin of Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. Kyiv: Parlam. vyd-vo. [in Ukrainian].
• Venegas, S.A. (2007), Presunciones у ficciones en el impuesto sobre la renta de las personas fisicas en Mexico [Prescriptions in fiction in the impulse about the rent of physical persons in Mexico]. Mexico: Universidad nacional autiinoma de Mexico. [in Spanish].
• Zozul, I.V. (2013), Pravovi prezumptsii v sumizhnomu terminolohichnomu riadi: porivnialno-pravova kharakterystyka (administratyvno-pravovyi aspekt). Visnyk Zaporizkoho natsionalnoho universytetu. Yurydychni nauky [Legal presumptions in adjacent terminology: comparative le¬gal characteristics (administrative legal aspect). Bulletin of Zaporo¬zhye National University. Legal humanities], no. 1(1), pp. 123–127. [in Ukrainian].

Identifiers

DOI

10.15804/ksm20210201

Biblioteka Nauki

1930602