112 research outputs found

    Vykdymo procesas: asmenų teisių ir pareigų balansas

    Get PDF
    This book is dedicated to enforcement proceedings which are the fundamental part of legal defence. It is also an integral part of the right to a fair trial. Without effective enforcement mechanisms the modern legal system would be illusionary and the rule of law would not be ensured. Since the self-defence of civil rights is strictly limited in the modern society, the state has the duty to establish mechanisms of enforcement which provide effective legal remedies and a fair balance of interests of the participants in these proceedings. The analysis of enforcement proceedings in this book begins with the assessment of the role of enforcement proceedings in the legal system. There are a couple of theories of enforcement proceedings. One theory says that enforcement is an independent legal system, another claims that it is a part of civil proceedings. Also, there a third theory which suggests that enforcement is a part of public law. Though all theories have certain arguments, the authors of this book argue that enforcement in Lithuania is a part of civil proceedings and could be reasonably regarded as “the last stage of civil proceedings”. The also authors focus on the analysis of sources of enforcement proceedings

    Administracinio teismo istorija Lietuvoje 1918–1940 m.

    Get PDF
    The book is comprised of three parts: the first one reviews the institutions that were similar to an administrative court in their competence; the second one analyzes legal acts and draft laws in which the control of the legality of administrative acts had been established or was intended to be established; and in the third one the scientific doctrine of administrative justice in interwar Lithuania is researched, as well as the journalistic articles of practitioners, mostly civil servants, and the attitude of students to the administrative court are reviewed. The analysis of these three aspects – institutions, legal acts, and doctrine – helped to achieve the goal of the research: to comprehensively reveal the history of the administrative court in interwar Lithuania

    The concept of a non - firearm in the Criminal Code: legal and theoretical aspects

    No full text
    Ginklai nuo senų laikų yra neatsiejami nuo žmonių ir kultūros. Ginklo sampratos yra naudojamos ne vienoje srityje, todėl dažnu atveju jos skiriasi. Ginklo sąvoka gali būti suprantama daugeliu aspektų – kariniu, baudžiamosios teisės, administracinės teisės, kriminologiniu, kriminalistiniu ir t.t. Nešaunamojo ginklo sampratos baudžiamasis kodeksas nepateikia, todėl teismai yra priversti remtis Lietuvos Respublikos ginklų ir šaudmenų kontrolės įstatymo nuostatoms. Teisės mokslininkų nuomone, GŠKĮ apibrėžta nešaunamojo ginklo kategorija negali būti „mechaniškai“ taikoma baudžiamojoje justicijoje.1 Šio darbo tikslas ištirti ar moksle ir teismų praktikoje yra kriterijai, kuriais remiantis įrankiai/priemonės yra priskiriami nešaunamajam ginklui. Visu pirma darbe aptarsime tarptautinius teisės aktus, kurie turėjo įtaką tiek šaunamųjų tiek nešaunamųjų ginklų kontrolei ir reglamentavimui Lietuvoje. Siekiant išanalizuoti esamą nešaunamojo ginklo sampratą, svarbu atskleisti nešaunamojo ginklo sampratos raidą Lietuvoje. Analizuodami GŠKĮ reglamentavimo kaitą, išskirsime esminius pakeitimus ir teisės mokslininkų nuomonę į tokius įstatymo leidėjo pakeitimus. Teismams dažnu atveju tenka spręsti panaudoto daikto kvalifikavimui ir priskyrimui prie specialiųjų veiką kvalifikuojančių požymių. Lietuvos Respublikos baudžiamojo kodekso 180 straipsnio 2 dalyje numatyti trys specialieji požymiai, peilis, nešaunamasis ginklas ir specialiai žmogui sužaloti pritaikytas daiktas. Siekiant atriboti nešaunamojo ginklo ir specialiai žmogui sužaloti skirto daikto sampratas, analizuosime teismų praktiką ir išskirsime šių sampratų atribojimo kriterijus. Antroje dalyje analizuosime Estijos valstybės teisės aktus reglamentuojančius ginklų kontrolę. Tiek Lietuvoje, tiek Estijoje ginklų kontrolės įstatymas buvo priimtas 2002 metais, pastebėtina, kad abiejų šalių įstatymų leidėjai šį įstatymą keitė ir koregavo dagiau nei 20 kartų. Šioje darbo dalyje lyginsime šiuo metu galiojančias ginklų kontrolės įstatymų redakcijas ir analizuosime skirtumus. Šių įstatymų analizės tikslas nustatyti ar esantys skirtumai gali būti naudingi Lietuvos Respublikos ginklų ir šaudmenų kontrolės įstatymo pakeitimams.Guns have been inseparable from ancient times from people and culture. The concepts of the weapon are used in more than one area, so often they differ. The concept of weapon can be understood in many respects – military, criminal law, administrative law, criminological, forensic, etc. The Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania uses, in certain cases, the concepts of a nonfirearm and an object specifically intended for the injury of a person. In the articles of criminal offences provided for in the Criminal Code, we may find these terms enshrined as the qualification of a criminal offence. The first article, which lays down these terms, is Article 180 of the Criminal Code, which governs criminal liability in the event of a robbery. In part two, a non-firing weapon and an object specifically intended for the harm to a person are established as signs of a criminal offence. Another Article 258 of the Unauthorized Code regulates criminal liability for the unlawful disposal of a non-firearms weapon. Under the regulation of this Article, a non-firearm and an object specifically intended for human harm shall be used as a separate norm. The concept of non-firearms is not provided by the criminal code, therefore the courts are forced to rely on the provisions of the Law on the Control of Weapons and Ammunition of the Republic of Lithuania. Without an accurate concept of a non-firearm, there are difficulties in disassemblying the used weapon from other items, which leads to the risk that a person may be wrongly charged or prosecuted. In the opinion of legal scholars, the category of non-firearms defined in the Statute for the Control of Weapons and Ammunition of the Republic of Lithuania cannot be "mechanically" applied in criminal justice. When examining the concept of a non-shot weapon, we will pay close attention to forensic science and the concept of non-firearms from a forensic point of view. The purpose of this work is to investigate whether science and case-law are criteria on the basis of which tools/means are classified as a non-shot weapon. In 2004 Lithuania acceded to the European Union and thus accepted the Acquis communautaire, which generally means European Community law and its practice of its application and includes the original Treaty establishing the Community. For this reason, the exchange of European Union directives to fully protect the state from criminal offences following the use of weapons has also changed the laws of Lithuania governing the control of arms and ammunition. Therefore, first of all, we will discuss international legislation in the work, which has influenced the control and regulation of both firearms and firearms in Lithuania. In order to analyze the current concept of non-firearms, it is important to reveal the development of the concept of non-firearms in Lithuania. By analyzing all amendments to the Law on Arms and Ammunition Control of the Republic of Lithuania, we will divide them into five stages, analyze each stage separately, distinguish the fundamental changes and the opinion of legal scholars into such amendments of the legislator. The courts often have to deal with the classification and classification of the item used as special characteristics of the offence. Paragraph 2 of Article 180 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania provides for three special features, a knife, a non-firing weapon and an object specially designed for the injury of a person. In this work, we will analyse the concepts of a nonfirearm and a special object for the injury of a person separately. When analysing each concept, we will pay close attention to the work and analyses of forensic scientists, distinguishing between the criteria for separating each item. In addition, in order to distinguish between the concepts of a nonfirearm and a special object intended for the injury of a person, we will analyse the case-law at the chosen time and distinguish the criteria for delimitation of these concepts. In the second part, we will analyse the legislation of the Estonian state on arms control. Both in Lithuania and Estonia the Arms Control Act was adopted in 2002, it should be noted that the legislators of both countries have changed and corrected this law more than 20 times, given that both countries belong to the European Union and must comply with the provisions of the Europe Agreement such similarities are not surprising. When analysing gun control laws, we will first compare the scope of the laws of both countries and the concept of non-firearms that is most relevant to this work. By comparing the arms control laws currently in force between the two countries, we will distinguish between specific weapons, comparing the regulation of non-firearms between the two countries, the exclusion of groups of weapons, and the separation of regulatory differences and similarities. The purpose of the analysis of these laws to determine whether the differences present may be useful for amendments to the Law on Arms and Ammunition Control of the Republic of Lithuania. This topic is relevant not only in the definition of criteria for non-firearms, but also in the investigation to determine whether the concept of non-firearms regulated by the Republic of Lithuania Law on Arms and Ammunition Control corresponds to the concept of non-firearms in the criminal code. A broader analysis of the criteria for non-firearms can be useful both for criminal law theory and for case-law.Teisės fakulteta
    • …
    corecore