The article is devoted to a comprehensive study of the procedure for screening foreign direct investment in the European Union and the approaches of member states to determining the institutional organisation of the body authorised to assess risks and make decisions. The relevance of the issue raised is confirmed by statistical indicators: currently, all 27 member states of the European Union have either already had a screening mechanism in place, made changes to their procedures, adopted new relevant legislation, or initiated the process of introducing screening in the future. Despite the recommended guidelines set out in Regulation (EU) 2019/452, which regulates the screening procedure at the European Union level, the specifics of the screening procedure are individual in each country and depend on a number of different factors. Accordingly, the key research question was: what institutional models of competent authorities have been formed in the European Union, how are the functions between investigation and decision-making distributed among them, and what does this mean for the implementation of common economic security objectives within national procedures? To achieve the research goal, the objectives and subject focus of foreign direct investment screening were outlined, the requirements of Regulation (EU) 2019/452 for national competent authorities and the cooperation mechanism were analysed, and criteria for classifying institutional models of national screening authorities were identified. The empirical basis of the study is the author's dataset, which reflects the institutional design of national foreign direct investment screening mechanisms in European Union member states within the meaning of Regulation (EU) 2019/452. Methodologically, the study combines comparative institutional and legal analysis with doctrinal interpretation of legal norms. The article concludes with conclusions presenting a conceptual vision of the characteristic features of institutional models for the organisation of foreign direct investment screening in European Union member states, as well as proposed guidelines that can be taken into account by legislators when developing a national screening system.
The relevance of the study is due to the dynamic changes in social relations, the reform of public administration and the need to integrate European standards of the rule of law into the administrative tort legislation of Ukraine. The purpose of the article is a comprehensive theoretical study of the institute of administrative responsibility as a specific type of legal responsibility that combines substantive and procedural elements. The work uses dogmatic, historical, comparative-legal and systemic methods of analysis of regulatory acts, scientific literature and judicial practice. As a result, the essence of administrative responsibility, its key functions (punitive, preventive, educational and restorative), and its public-legal nature, which is implemented through state coercion measures by authorized bodies, are revealed. The administrative offense as the main basis for liability, its features (illegality, guilt, social harm) and elements of composition (object, objective side, subject, subjective side) are analyzed in detail. Current problems of regulatory framework are identified: the conceptual obsolescence of the main codified act of 1984, fragmentation of regulation, duplication of norms in special laws and insufficient compliance of procedures for bringing to liability with the standards of the right to a fair trial. The prospects for improvement through the adoption of a new code on administrative misdemeanors, unification of norms, differentiation of penalties, introduction of alternative sanctions and strengthening of procedural guarantees of individual rights are substantiated, which will increase the efficiency of public administration and the level of citizens’ trust in the state. Prospects for further research are related to assessing the practical effectiveness of the new model of administrative responsibility after its implementation.
The study of issues that are considered and resolved during the execution of court decisions in criminal proceedings, and in particular the features of their classification and the characteristics of their varieties according to various criteria, is important both for the science of criminal procedure and for the practice of law enforcement. After all, a correct understanding of the legal nature of the varieties of such issues allows for the proper and effective implementation of criminal procedural activities at the stage of execution of court decisions, and therefore contributes to a faster achievement of the goal of criminal proceedings in general and the fulfillment of its tasks in particular. The purpose of the article is a critical analysis of approaches to the classification of issues that are resolved during the execution of court decisions, which take place in the domestic scientific literature, and the expression of the author's position on dividing them into varieties according to various criteria and the characteristics of individual ones. In the work, thanks to the use of a system of scientific knowledge methods, this goal was achieved. The results of the study consist in expressing support for the scientific position on the need to distinguish two stages of the stage of execution of court decisions: first, the appeal of the court decision for execution; second, consideration and resolution of issues related to the execution of court decisions. Based on the analysis of the regulatory regulation of both stages of the stage of execution of court decisions and law enforcement practice, it is concluded that the second stage is the main content of this stage. In addition, the work has classified the issues that are considered and resolved at the stage of execution of court decisions according to various criteria, and characterized the legal nature of some of them. In the study, for the first time in the domestic criminal procedural doctrine, the possibility of dividing issues according to a number of different criteria has been proposed, in particular: depending on the nature of the circumstances that determine their resolution; on the behavior of the convicted person, which determines the resolution of certain issues; on the legal nature of the issues that arise; on the presence of a direct connection with achieving the goal of punishment. The greatest research attention was paid to the classification and characterization of issues considered and resolved in the execution of court decisions, depending on the nature of the impact of judicial control activities on the court's decisions (on corrective and concretizing and the allocation of corrective and concretizing judicial control) and depending on the form of the impact of judicial control activities on the rights of persons to whom they relate (law-enforcing and law-restricting and the definition of law-enforcing and law-restricting judicial control).
This article examines the phenomenon of the mobile conflict in the law of matrimonial property regimes within the framework of private international law. A mobile conflict arises when spouses relocate between states, potentially altering the connecting factor that determines the applicable law governing their property regime. The relevance of the topic is driven by the growing international mobility of married couples, the deepening European integration of Ukraine, and the absence of specific conflict-of-laws rules on matrimonial property regimes involving a foreign element in national legislation, which gives rise to divergent case law. The aim of the article is to examine the principle of immutability of the matrimonial property regime in cross-border relations through the lens of the European approach and national case law, and to substantiate the need for a clear distinction between the property statute and the matrimonial property statute when adjudicating such disputes. The achievement of this aim was made possible through a comprehensive methodological approach, including the comparative legal method to contrast the legal regulation of the EU, Italy and Ukraine; the formal legal method to interpret conflict-of-laws rules and judicial decisions; and the systemic method to establish the interrelationship between property law, family law and private international law. The article traces the doctrinal evolution from classical models of automatic mutability to the modern principle of immutability, codified in EU Regulation No. 2016/1103 on the law applicable to matrimonial property regimes. Particular attention is devoted to the distinction between the matrimonial property statute and the property statute, the conflation of which is identified as a recurring error in judicial practice. Through analysis of the Supreme Court of Ukraine judgment of 28 January 2026 in case No. 554/4080/23, the article examines the divergent approaches of successive court instances to the legal status of real property acquired in Ukraine by spouses who had contracted marriage in Italy under the separate property regime. It is concluded that the court of first instance correctly applied the conflict-of-laws rule recognising the foreign matrimonial agreement, whereas the appellate court erred by substituting the matrimonial property statute with the property statute. The Supreme Court held that the separation regime chosen at the time of marriage constitutes an element of the matrimonial property statute and continues to govern property acquired during marriage regardless of its location. The article argues for harmonisation of the Ukrainian approach with the immutability principle enshrined in EU law.
The relevance of this study is determined by the need to improve mechanisms for the protection of digital and informational rights in Ukraine, driven by global societal digitalization and the intensification of armed aggression by the russian federation. The aim of the research is to conduct a systematic analysis of the issues surrounding the safeguarding of digital and informational rights, to substantiate the necessity of establishing the institution of the Ombudsman of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine for Digital and Informational Human Rights, and to develop conceptual proposals regarding its functioning. The research employs comparative-legal methods (examining national and international legislation), historical-legal analysis, formal-logical reasoning, and methods of analysis and synthesis. The study identifies gaps in the current system for protecting digital and informational rights, particularly the lack of adequate parliamentary oversight and the insufficiency of mechanisms for responding to violations, and proposes a conceptual framework for the ombudsman institution. Prospects for further research include developing mechanisms for interaction between the commissioner and other state institutions, as well as determining effective tools to evaluate the efficiency of activities in the field of digital and informational rights protection.
