Suchergebnisse

On the basis of existing legislation and the modern judicial and expert practice are considered the basic questions of destination expertise in civil and arbitration proceedings. Analysis allows us to identify the most problematic aspects of destination expertise in the resolution of civil and commercial cases and offer certain tactical recommendations. ; На базе действующего законодательства и с учетом результатов обобщения судебной и экспертной практики рассматриваются основные вопросы назначения экспертизы в гражданском и арбитражном судопроизводстве. Проведенный анализ позволил выявить ряд проблем, возникающих при назначении экспертизы в ходе рассмотрения гражданских и арбитражных дел, и предложить рекомендации по их разрешению.

AbstractWhy do prime ministers or presidents appoint non‐elected experts, also known as technocrats, during economic crises? Do they appoint them for their expertise or for their commitment to pro‐market reforms? Answering this question is crucial for understanding and predicting the longer‐term role of technocrats in democracies. With the aid of unique data on the political and personal background of finance ministers in 13 parliamentary and semi‐presidential European democracies this article shows that commitment, not expertise is the primary driver of technocratic appointments during major economic crises. Technocrats are preferred over experienced politicians when the latter lack commitment to policy reform. An important implication of the findings is that technocratic appointments to top economic portfolios in West European countries are unlikely to become the norm outside economic crises, assuming economic crises are short‐lived and not recurring.

У статті розглянуто порядок призначення та проведення економічної експертизи згідно з Кримінальним процесуальним, Цивільним процесуальним, Господарським процесуальним кодексами України та Кодексом адміністративного судочинства України. Встановлено, що у цивільному та адміністративному процесі порядок призначення та проведення експертиз, у тому числі й економічних (бухгалтерського та податкового обліку; фінансово-господарської діяльності; фінансово-кредитних операцій) на рівні законодавчого регламентування майже тотожні за змістом і суттю, а у господарському – регулюється поверхнево і недостатньо. The aim of the paper is to compile information on the procedure of appointing and conducting of economic expertise by type of procedural law, as well as to identify problems and inconsistencies and the ways of solving them in order to improve judicial procedures. Within the performance of the relevant type of investigation and trial economic expertise may be administered and conducted, including expertise of: accounting and taxation; financial activities; financial and credit operations. Purpose and conduct of economic expertise depending on the type and extent of open justice prosecution is held according to the Criminal Procedure, Civil Procedure, Commercial Procedural Code of Ukraine and the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine. In civil and administrative procedures the appointment and conduct of expertise, including economic expertise on the level of legislative regulation, are nearly identical in content and nature and in the economic procedure – are not regulated sufficiently and in detail. The value of the results is obtained in the study of procedure of the appointment and conduct of economic expertise and in identifying gaps and ways to deal with them in the legal regulation of judicial procedures.

Every society recognizes expertise, and anthropologists have long documented the culturally and historically specific practices that constitute it. The anthropology of expertise focuses on what people do rather than what people possess, even in the many circumstances where the former is naturalized as the latter. Across its many domains, expertise is both inherently interactional, involving the participation of objects, producers, and consumers of knowledge, and inescapably ideological, implicated in the evolving hierarchies of value that legitimate particular ways of knowing as "expert." This review focuses on the semiotics of expertise, highlighting four constitutive processes: socialization practices through which people establish intimacy with classes of cultural objects and learn to communicate that familiarity; evaluation, or the establishment of asymmetries among people and between people and objects; institutionalization, wherein ways of knowing are organized and authorized; and naturalization, or the essentialization of expert enactments as bodies of knowledge.