The article examines the issue of multiple intersectional discrimination in employment relations. The aspects of the Pay Transparency Directive in the context of multiple intersectional discrimination are revealed, the established concept of the prohibition of multiple discrimination is analysed, and the possible further impact on the development of European Union Anti-discrimination law is analysed. The strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities of the Pay Transparency Directive are also presented. It is assessed that multiple intersectional discrimination is a complex phenomenon, the recognition of which requires an appropriate analysis of the interaction of discriminatory grounds, and the need to select an appropriate comparative measure is noted. The article analyses cases considered by the Court of Justice of the European Union in which the issue of the interaction between multiple intersectional discriminations remained unresolved due to a possible lack of legal doctrine. In conclusion, insights are provided on the possible further assessment of multiple intersectoral discrimination and a new approach to anti-discrimination law in the European Union.Keywords: multiple intersectional discrimination, wages, employment income, transparency, Court of Justice of the European Union, preliminary judgement, employment relations.
This article is dedicated to the protection of human rights in the process of digital technology development in Uzbekistan, highlighting the relevance, goals, and main directions of legal reforms in new socio-political conditions. The impact of the Internet, artificial intelligence, blockchain, and big data systems on human rights, the protection of personal data, cybersecurity, and modern threats arising in the field of information freedom are analyzed. The article highlights the role of the Information Code, its potential to guarantee citizens’ rights in the digital space, and the harmonization of national and international standards within the digital economy and e-government system. The results of the study will help identify mechanisms for controlling digital risks and practical protection of digital rights through the information code. The article also compares international experience and strategic approaches in Uzbekistan, providing scientific and practical recommendations.
The article is dedicated to a comprehensive theoretical and legal analysis of child rights as an independent intersectoral category of international and national law. The concept, essence, and key characteristics of child rights – universality, inalienability, specificity, comprehensiveness, and international legal conditioning – are revealed, forming a special legal regime for protecting childhood. Based on the 1989 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan, including the Law “On Guarantees of the Rights of the Child” and the Family Code, the existing classification approaches are systematized: from the 3Ps (Provision – Participation – Protection) model and its modifications to the division of rights into personal non-property and property. Particular attention is paid to the functional purpose of child rights: protective, developmental, socializing, guaranteeing, communicative, and preventive functions are identified and characterized in their interconnection. The author’s central contribution is the substantiation of the expanded 3P + G model, where the fourth component – institutional guarantees – includes procedural protection mechanisms, the child’s right to independent representation, and a system for constant monitoring of guardianship conditions. The proposed model is justified in relation to alternative care situations, where the increased vulnerability of a child deprived of parental care objectively requires institutional strengthening of existing guarantees.
The article provides an international legal analysis of the implementation of standards for protecting women’s rights in the digital sphere in the Republic of Uzbekistan. Universal and regional mechanisms are examined, including the provisions of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), substantive equality, due diligence, and gender mainstreaming. Special attention is paid to transforming the digital environment into a space for both the realization and violation of women’s rights, including phenomena such as cyberviolence and digital discrimination. It analyzes Uzbekistan’s national legislation and its compliance with international obligations and identifies existing gaps in implementation mechanisms. The work substantiates the necessity of improving legal regulation and institutional mechanisms to ensure substantive gender equality in the context of digitalization.
Given the increasing number of cases in which Lithuanian courts decide on the arrangements for a child’s communication with the parent living separately, under which the child spends an equal amount of time with both parents, the article analyses the criteria to be applied when assessing whether such an arrangement is compatible with the best interests of the child. Using document analysis, case law analysis, systematic and comparative methods, the article examines the relevant legal regulation, identifies the criteria established in the practice of the Supreme Court of Lithuania, and analyses their content and application in the most recent appellate case law. The article reveals that, according to the Supreme Court of Lithuania’s established practice, the key criteria to be evaluated should include: the child’s opinion, the child›s age and needs, parents› place of residence and distance from the child’s educational institution, parents’ ability to implement such an arrangement, the child›s bond with each parent, and inter-parental relationships. The influence of the Principles of European Family Law regarding Parental Responsibilities developed by the Commission on European Family Law (CEFL) may have shaped these criteria. The analysis of appellate court practice demonstrates that courts generally use these criteria for a comprehensive assessment of the child›s best interests when deciding on the establishment of maximum contact arrangements. However, it is observed that in most cases the evaluation is limited to only certain criteria rather than all of them, and a more thorough assessment of the aspect of interparental conflict is particularly lacking.Keywords: best interests of the child, contact arrangements with the non-resident parent, case law of the Supreme Court of Lithuania, inter-parental relationships, joint physical custody.
This article analyses the provision of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania governing the recovery of the value of property subject to confiscation. The recovery of such value is a criminal law measure that contributes to achieving the purposes of punishment and ensures that criminal activities become economically unprofitable. A criminal measure imposed on an offender, like a penalty, must be individualized; therefore, it must not only serve a repressive function but also be proportionate and fair. Although the legislator has not provided for the possibility of recovering only part of the amount corresponding to the value of property subject to confiscation, the Supreme Court of Lithuania has clarified in its case law that, in order to uphold the principle of the rule of law, courts may, taking into account the circumstances of the criminal offence, the characteristics of the offender, and other relevant circumstances of the case, decide on the recovery of only part of such value. In determining the amount to be recovered, courts should in all cases also assess the offender’s financial situation in order to ensure that the imposed measure complies with the principles of justice, proportionality, and the rule of law. The article also examines whether an amount of money corresponding to the value of property, including VAT, is consistent with the concept of property value.Keywords: confiscation of property; recovery of an amount of money corresponding to the value of property; value of the asset; value of the asset including VAT; value of instrumentalities of a criminal offence.
Článek se zaměřuje na analýzu zásady účinné soudní ochrany zakotvené v čl. 19 odst. 1 Smlouvy o EU a v článku 47 Listiny EU. Poukazuje na její dvojí povahu jakožto jednak zásadu vymezující institucionální uspořádání Unie, jednak zásadu chránící zájmy jednotlivců vyplývající z práva EU. Článek zejména ukazuje, jak se z tohoto principu, původně vycházejícího ze zásady účinnosti ve smyslu Rewe kritérií, stal samostatný způsob přezkumu souladu vnitrostátních procesních norem s požadavky práva EU spojený s kvalitativně jedinečnými vlastnostmi, které této zásadě umožňují zasahovat do vnitrostátních procesních nastavení intenzivněji než původní princip účinnosti. Z toho potom vyplývá potenciál sloužit v budoucnu jako výchozí způsob přezkumu, na který se Soudní dvůr obrací při vyvažování zájmů práva EU a zájmů vnitrostátního řízení.
Both Article 3.72 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania and the German BGB (German: Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch, abbreviated - BGB) regulate mutual material maintenance between former spouses. This article analyzes Article 3.72 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania and the norms of the BGB regulating the obligation of spouses to support each other materially, and provides examples of the interpretation and application of legal norms formed in court practice. It should be noted that Lithuanian judicial practice on the issue under consideration is not particularly extensive, courts are nevertheless slow to satisfy claims for maintenance for a former spouse, and court decisions are essentially based on the general principles and grounds for the necessity of material maintenance for spouses, and this practice has not changed substantially over the years. It is believed that the analysis of the rules for the interpretation and application of legal norms regarding the necessity of spousal maintenance formed in German judicial practice will provide an opportunity to evaluate this institute from a different perspective and will create the prerequisites for a broader and more frequent applicability of Article 3.72 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania in national law when examining cases of this type.Keywords: spousal maintenance, divorce, periodic payments, support, Lithuanian Civil Code, German BGB.
Cílem tohoto článku bylo zkoumat perspektivu moderních parlamentů, v níž by se pokoušely o zapojení umělé inteligence do svých procedur, a to jako žádoucí inovace jejich standardního průběhu. V tomto směru bylo nejprve nutné pracovat s pojmy jako je politika a demokracie, s jejichž porozuměním bylo možné dojít k odpovědi na položenou otázku: jsou AI systémy kompatibilní s politickými činnostmi parlamentu? Po provedené analýze pojmů jsem po zvážení dalších souvisejících skutečností (rolí parlamentu či pravidel ústavního pořádku) dospěla k přesvědčení, že pouze doplňková spolupráce lidského politika s určitým typem AI nástroje je z hlediska demokratického jádra politiky jediným bezpečným východiskem ze zkoumané situace. Komplexní pokrytí tvorby politických rozhodnutí ze strany AI by naopak hrozilo praktickým vymizením principů, pro něž jim je dáno vznikat v natolik důmyslném a organizačně složitém procesu, z jehož premis demokratická debata uvnitř parlamentu vyúsťuje.
Článek se zabývá pojetím subjektivní stránky trestní odpovědnosti velitelů (command responsibility) v mezinárodním trestním právu, přičemž sleduje napětí mezi principem individuální odpovědnosti a konstrukcí trestní odpovědnosti za opomenutí konat. Výchozím bodem je analýza článku 30 Římského statutu, který definuje obecný rámec zavinění, a jeho vztah ke zvláštnímu režimu odpovědnosti podle článku 28. Pozornost je věnována historickému vývoji od případu Yamashita přes kodifikaci v Dodatkovém protokolu I až po výkladovou praxi ICTY, ICTR a ICC. Důraz je kladen na variabilitu standardu mens rea, zejména rozdíly mezi přístupy „knew“, „had reason to know“ a „should have known“, které nebyly dosud sjednoceny. Případ Prosecutor v. Bemba slouží jako ukázka interpretační roztříštěnosti v rámci ICC. Studie upozorňuje na právní a systémová rizika plynoucí z nejednotnosti konstrukce odpovědnosti velitelů, která ohrožuje právní jistotu i rovnost před zákonem.
Článek analyzuje vývoj judikatury Soudního dvora EU týkající se povinnosti unijních zemí uznat manželství osob stejného pohlaví uzavřené v jiném státě EU v období mezi kauzou Coman (2018) a Trojan (2025). Článek demonstruje, že zatímco v první kauze byla argumentace soudu založena na omezujícím dopadu neuznání stejnopohlavního manželství na mobilitu unijních občanů garantovanou čl. 21 SFEU, v novější kauze Trojan unijní soudci rozšířili svůj argumentář o čl. 21 Listiny základních práv Unie, zakazující diskriminaci z důvodu sexuální orientace. Závěr článku je věnován možné reakci Polska na rozsudek v kauze Trojan a riziku vzniku konfliktu mezi požadavky unijního práva a definicí manželství v polské ústavě.
This article analyses the importance of the contra spoliatorem rule in civil proceedings, examining how it ensures balance between parties’ rights to litigate and their duty to cooperate. It reveals that this rule enables the court to draw procedural conclusions in cases where a party deliberately fails to fulfil their duty to cooperate and submit relevant evidence in order to gain a procedural advantage. However, it is emphasised that application of the contra spoliatorem rule is not automatic; in each case, the court must assess the reasons for failing to submit evidence and determine whether negative procedural conclusions can be drawn. The article also discusses situations where the failure to submit evidence arises not from dishonest behavior, but from a legitimate duty to protect professional, state, service or commercial secrets. In such cases, protecting confidential information takes on special legal significance linked to protecting the public interest, state security, trust between lawyers and clients, and professional independence.Keywords: contra spoliatorem, principle of cooperation, secret information.
Článek analyzuje ústavněprávní rámec zdravotnické detence se zaměřením na postavení pacienta coby slabší strany. Východiskem je právo jednotlivce na sebeurčení a ochranu osobní svobody, jejichž omezení je přípustné pouze na základě zákona, při respektování proporcionality a podstaty základních práv. Text se zabývá podmínkami vyplývajícími z Listiny základních práv a svobod, Úmluvy o lidských právech a biomedicíně a Evropské úmluvy o lidských právech, zejména čl. 5 odst. 1 písm. e). Zvláštní pozornost je věnována judikatuře Evropského soudu pro lidská práva a otázce efektivity procesních záruk v aplikační praxi, zejména riziku formalizace soudního přezkumu, omezené efektivitě právní pomoci a problematice krátkodobých detencí.
The state, having created a monopoly on enforcement of justice, namely the examination of legal disputes in courts, simultaneously creates other effective means of protection of substantive legal relations. One of them is the assignment of such disputes to other institution for the hearing of the dispute in a pre-trial procedure. The pre-trial procedure may be mandatory or optional. When the pre-trial procedure is mandatory, a person seeking to defend his potentially violated subjective rights must first use it and only then acquire the right to apply to court (presumption of the right to access to court). As in any dispute resolution institution, when resolving such disputes in a mandatory pre-trial procedure, the parties may incur litigation costs. Then a reasonable question arises regarding the (non) compensation of such costs. This article examines the problems of (non)compensation of litigation costsincurred in the labor dispute commission, which is required to examine labor disputes in a pre-trial procedure. According to the pre-trial labor dispute resolution model established in Lithuania, the litigation costs incurred by the parties in such a process are not compensated (distributed). Though such a rule is recognized as justified in case law, and the constitutionality of the relevant norm has been verified in the constitutional procedure, the article examines whether such formed case law and the latest position of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania are (in)compatible with the effective protection of the rights of participants in violated labor relations. It is analyzed whether such a rule of (non)compensation of litigation costs may unreasonably limit the possibilities of participants in labor legal relations to effectively defend their violated rights.Keywords: labor dispute, mandatory pre-trial litigation order, litigation costs, representation.
