GEVORG ISRAYELYAN

Candidate of Law, Associate Professor,

Head of the Scientific Research Center of Applied problems in criminology of

National Bureau of Expertises of National Academy of

Sciences of the Republic of Armenia,

Lecturer of the Department of Law at

Eurasia International University

DOI: https://doi.org/10.59546/18290744-2025.7-9-86

 

Annotation.

The criminological significance of the manifestation in reality of objective signs of certain types of crimes is due to the possibility of determining tactics and features of preventive measures. This is especially pronounced in relation to computer theft.

Analyzing the object and predicate of the crime, the author notes that these signs distinguish computer theft from crimes against the security of a computer system and computer data, and therefore determine the differentiation of preventive measures for these types of crimes.

Turning to the stages of criminal activity, the author emphasizes that persuasion can be effective at the stage of preparation of a crime, coercion at the stage of an attempt, and in the case of an ongoing crime, when some of the acts included in the general intent have already been committed, both persuasion and coercion can be used to prevent the remaining episodes.

Analyzing the methods of committing computer theft, the author argues that the crime in question differs from other types of theft in the ways it is committed, which in turn is the basis for the differentiated implementation of preventive measures. In addition, the methods of computer theft find their manifestation in specific criminological situations, which were analyzed by the author. Knowledge of these situations should be the basis for organizing the prevention of this crime.

Revealing the characteristics of the means of computer theft, the author notes that the choice of preventive measures and tactics is determined by the type of means.

PDF

VIRAB HAMBARDZUMAYN

Lecturer at Yerevan State University,

Chair of Criminal Law

DOI: https://doi.org/10.59546/18290744-2025.7-9-64

 

Annotation.

Although weapons play an important role and are important in maintaining law and order, protecting human rights and ensuring security, they are often used to violate human rights.

In accordance with international human rights law, states are required to ensure the proper protection of human rights, which, among other things, implies the obligation to prevent and suppress actions by private individuals aimed at impeding the realization of these rights.

Despite the fact that the national legislation of the Republic of Armenia regulating arms trafficking generally complies with international standards and does not contradict the provisions of international documents, an analysis of the current legislation shows that a number of key issues remain unresolved or have not been fully resolved. This article is devoted to the study of these problems.

Based on the results of the study, it is proposed to revise the legal provisions concerning the licensing system provided for by the RA Law “On Regulation of Arms Trafficking”, taking into account the need for more effective protection of fundamental human rights. In addition, it is proposed to supplement the Code of Administrative Offences with new offences providing for administrative liability for violations of legally established restrictions and prohibitions on arms trafficking.

PDF

MARIAM MANUKYAN

Master of Law,

Member of the RA Chamber of Advocates, Advocate

DOI: https://doi.org/10.59546/18290744-2025.7-9-51

 

Annotation.

Within the framework of the scientific research, an attempt is made to reveal the legal features and factual possibility of application of one of the powers of the RA Civil Court of Appeal - the power to establish a new fact or factual circumstance.

In particular, by discussing the issue of the legal possibility of the RA Civil Court of Appeal to establish any fact at its own discretion, regardless of the evidence examined by the court of first instance, or to establish any factual circumstance, regardless of the factual circumstances established by the court of first instance, if this arises from the interests of the efficiency of justice. We have attempted to present the scope of discretion of the RA Civil Court of Appeal (hereinafter also referred to as the Court of Appeal) in the choice of its powers.

The relevance of the research is conditioned by the developing legal practice, the diversity of the powers of the Court of Appeal and the complexity of their content.

The main goals of this work are:

• As a result of a systematic analysis, to identify the criteria for choosing the powers of the RA Court of Appeal and their features,

• Conduct a legal analysis, identifying the legal specifics and factual possibility of application of the authority to establish a new fact or factual circumstance,

• Analyze in detail the nature and content of the legislative formulations of the Court of Appeal’s determination of a new fact based on the evidence examined by the lower court or the determination of a fact established by the court as unestablished, as well as the factual circumstances established by the court of first instance.

• Presentation of broad and narrow interpretations of specific articles of the RA legislation, their disclosure and justification.

• Identification and justification of comments aimed at overcoming legal uncertainty.

Problems of the scientific paper answered the following questions:

1.Does the RA Civil Court of Appeal have the legal ability to establish any fact at its own discretion, regardless of the evidence examined by the court of first instance, or to establish any factual circumstance, regardless of the factual circumstances established by the court of first instance, if this arises from the interests of the efficiency of justice?

2. Shouldn’t the RA Court of Appeals have a legislative duty to justify the choice of its powers to be exercised as a result of the examination of the appeal filed against the judgment defined by the RA Civil Procedure Code and/ or does the RA Court of Appeals not currently have such a legislative duty?

PDF

MANE MARKOSYAN

Ph.D. Student at the Chair of Civil Law,

Faculty of Law, YSU,

Prosecutor General’s Office of the RA,

Adviser to the Prosecutor General of the RA

DOI: https://doi.org/10.59546/18290744-2025.7-9-36

 

Annotation.

In the article, the author discussed the concept of a subsoil use contract, the legislative regulation issues and characteristics of contractual relations in subsoil use, directions for the development of legislation in this context, as well as the elements of a subsoil use contract.

As a result of studying the RA Subsoil Code, the author concluded that under the current domestic legal regulations, the term «subsoil use contract» is used as a collective concept for all contracts concluded for the purpose of granting the right to use subsoil and does not have an independent meaning.

Based on the study of the essential terms of subsoil use contracts, the author identified the common essential terms that apply to all such contracts. The peculiarities of systematizing the essential terms of subsoil use contracts by law, as well as defining essential terms specific to particular types of subsoil use contracts were also addressed. Furthermore, the author examined the legal significance of the terms comprising the content of subsoil use contracts, as approved by the annexes to the RA Government Decision No. 437-N of March 22, 2022.

The author proposed to unify the legal norms regulating contractual relations in the field of subsoil use under the RA Subsoil Code by including a separate chapter dedicated to contracts concluded in the subsoil use sector, and to systematize the essential terms of subsoil use contracts based on the analysis presented in the study.

PDF

ARPINE HOVHANNISYAN

Lecturer at the Chair of Civil Law of

YSU Faculty of Law, PhD,

Associate Professor

MARIAM AYVAZYAN

LLM

DOI: https://doi.org/10.59546/18290744-2025.7-9-26

 

Annotation.

The right of reproduction constitutes one of the most fundamental and central rights within the framework of copyright and related rights. Technological advancements in the digital age have significantly transformed both the practical application and interpretative approaches to this right. Contemporary technologies allow for the reproduction of copyright-protected works and performances in a wide array of formats and through various means—often enabling the creation of an almost unlimited number of copies within mere seconds.

In this context, and considering the challenges posed by the digital environment, the article seeks to analyze the exceptions to the right of reproduction, namely, the acts of temporary and transient reproduction that do not require authorization from the rights holder. Given the absence of any interpretative guidance on these exceptions within Armenian legal practice, the analysis relies on the provisions of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonization of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society, as well as on the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). This approach is particularly relevant since Armenian legislation reflects the terminology and legal concepts set forth in the Directive with respect to the right of reproduction.

The article identifies and examines the interpretative criteria developed by the CJEU concerning temporary and transient acts of reproduction, which may serve as valuable guidance for the Armenian legal system in adopting a contemporary interpretation of the right of reproduction.

PDF

VLADIMIR HOVSEPYAN

Applicant of the Institute of Philosophy, Sociology and

Law of the National Academy of Sciences

DOI: https://doi.org/10.59546/18290744-2025.7-9-17

 

Annotation.

After the abolition of the Bagratid kingdom in the first half of the 12th century, the eastern edge of Armenia became more independent politically, which dictated the need to create national legislation. The first to undertake this task was David’s son Alavki, who created a major monument of legal thought, which, although not officially approved by the state authorities of the time, was used in Armenian communities by both the clergy and community officials to regulate various legal issues.

The historical significance of David’s Rules lies in the fact that the first attempt at codification of legislation in Armenian reality was made, in which a number of progressive solutions for the time were given to issues arising in the fields of civil, criminal, labor relations and spiritual life.

The very fact that 44 years after the death of David’s son Alavka (1140), M. Gosh began writing his famous “Code of Laws”, a number of provisions of which were literally borrowed from David’s “Code of Laws”, proves not only that he had David’s works at hand, but also that this work was to be used within Armenia, in particular in its eastern region - in Artsakh and Utik.

PDF

Այլ հոդվածներ …