Search results

Active legal regulations, judicial practice, and law-enforcement experience have been used as the research core.

The works by A. Atsupov and S. Baklanovskii, devoted to classification tasks, as a way of discovering system features of multiple conflicts, have served for the research’s theoretical foundation.

The basis of such classification, including the classification by the subject content, has been studied using the works by R. Kraakman, P. Davies, H. Hansmann, G. Hertig, K. Hopt, H. Kanda, and E. Rjck.

Inter- and outer-group conflicts as well as the dependence on the social structure have been investigated using the studies of L. Coser. The interrelation between the social structure, a conflict’s institutionalization, and defining the extents of its admissibility have been analyzed with the help of the works by B. Collins, N. Grachev, D. Rant, A. Inshakova, K. Frohnapfel, V. Letyayev, etc.

When defining a self-sufficient group of corporate conflicts by the primary content criteria, the research authors have relied on the works by V. Dolinskaya and V. Slesarev, devoted to the subject of the private law theory.

V. Yadov’s scientific research has helped state corporate conflicts’ goals in terms of their classification. Here we imply the research, pointing out that such conflicts will either directly or indirectly be connected with the property sphere.

The actions of corporate conflicts’ parties, which predetermine their classification by the correlation with lawful behavior, have been examined owing to the works of L. Coser.

The issue of corporate conflicts and economic relations’ criminalization by embezzling, seizure, and rearranging the property, which includes bankruptcy proceedings, has been studied by means of Yu. Borisov, V. Dolinskaya, and N. Kavelina’s works.

The works by A. Inshakova and V. Slesareva, devoted to the sources of law, have contributed to corporate conflicts’ classification study.

The interconnection between the completion stage of the corporate conflicts dynamics and their settlement has been investigated in the framework of justifying the classification, basing on the completion method, taking into account the scientific results, reflected in the works by A. Antsupov, A. Danelyan, V. Laptev, and A. Shipilov.

In the course of study, corporate conflicts’ classification by their consequences, which can either be destructive and constructive, the research authors have used the studies by R. Freeman, devoted to the stakeholders’ theory, their interests’ balance, and the ways of forming the business’s economic environment.

The normative basis of the research are the provisions of sectoral codified acts by: the Arbitration Procedural Code of the Russian Federation, the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as well as special federal laws – The Federal Law “On Joint Stock Companies” as of December 26, 1995, No. 208.

The empirical basis of this research relies on the of the Russian Federation’s Constitutional Court’s Resolution as of July 18, 2003, No.14-P “On the case of verifying the constitutionality of the provisions of Article 35 of the Federal Law “On Joint-Stock Companies,” Articles 61 and 69 of the Russian Federation Civil Code, Article 31 of the Russian Federation Tax Code, and Article 14 of the Russian Federation Arbitration Procedure Code; the Russian Federation Constitutional Court Provisions as of March 15, 2003, No.3-P “On the Case of Constitutionality Review of Article 278 Paragraph 2 and Article 279 of the Russian Federation Labour Code and para 2 of Paragraph 4 of the Article 69 of the “On Joint-Stock Companies” Federal Law.

The following general scientific and specific scientific methods have been applied in this chapter: observation, complex and multi-sectoral analysis, synthesis, analogy, comparison, explanation, justification, induction, deduction, reduction, elementarism, system approach, comparative law method, specific sociological studies, logical, statistic, and so on.

The basis of the analysis carried out in this part of the work was the normative and advisory sources included in the system of Russian law in the sphere of corporate conflicts regulation.

For the purpose of a comprehensive study of the existing norms and the definition of promising trends in their development, the provisions of policy acts of a strategic nature, such as the concept of development of the legislation of the Russian Federation for the period 2008–2011 and the concept of 2016 to improve the legislation of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2021 were studied.

The study examined the provisions of industry-specific codified acts of both regulatory and advisory nature, such as the civil code of the Russian Federation, the code of corporate conduct (now invalid), and the code of corporate governance, approved by the Board of Directors of the Central Bank of Russia from April 10, 2014.

Among the special Federal laws that form the basis of positive legal regulation of corporate conflicts are: Federal law No. 205-FL “On amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation”; Federal law No. 82-FL of May 19, 1995, “on public associations”; Federal law No. 193-FL of December 8, 1995, “on agricultural cooperation”; Federal law No. 7-FL of January 12, 1996, “on non-profit associations”; Federal law No. 79-FL of July 27, 2004, “on the state civil service of the Russian Federation”; Federal law No. 7-FL “on non-profit associations” of December 25, 2008, g. 273-FL “on combating corruption”; the Federal law of March 2, 2007 No. 25-FL “on municipal service in the Russian Federation.”

In the course of the study, the authors actively formed an empirical base and turned to judicial and arbitration practice, which were: the Decision of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of July 18, 2003, No.14-P “in the case of verification of the constitutionality of the provisions of Article 35 of the Federal law “on joint stock companies,” Articles 61 and 99 of the civil code of the Russian Federation, Article 31 of the tax code of the Russian Federation, and Article 14 of the Arbitration procedural code of the Russian Federation; the Decision of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of March 15, 2005. No.3-P “in the case of verification of the constitutionality of the provisions of paragraph 2 of Article 278 and Article 279 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation and paragraph 2 of paragraph 4 of Article 69 of the Federal law” on joint stock companies; resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation of June 20, 2007, No. 40 “on some issues of practice of the provisions of the legislation on transactions with interest” ; resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of June 26, 2018, No.27 “on challenging major transactions and transactions in which there is an interest”; Resolution of the FAS of the Ural district of June 23, 2004, No. F09-1854/04-CL, etc.

The concept of “conflict” in terms of etymology, as well as social conflictology and social sciences is studied in the chapter on the example of the works of L. Coser, J. Von Neumann, N. Morgenstern, V. Yadov, T. V. Novikova, etc.

Studying corporate conflicts in legal doctrine, the authors turned to the works of D. I. Dedov and A. A. Kirillov.

The theory of interest and “legally protected interests” were studied thanks to the works of Rudolf von Ihering, who as the main idea behind the development of mechanisms for their balance. In the Russian doctrine, the issues of subjective and legitimate interests were developed in the works of Y. S. Gambarov, V. P. Gribanov, N. M. Korkunova, and G. F. Shershenevich.

The essence of socially significant interests that receive legal regulation from the state and become legal (legal) interests was studied on the basis of the works of N. V. Vitruka, R. E. Gukasyan, O. S. Ioffe, E. A. Krasheninnikova, and N. I. Matuzova.

The methodological basis of the study was a set of general and particular scientific research methods: observation, complex and diversified analysis, synthesis, analogy, comparison, explanation, proof, induction, deduction, reduction, elementalism, systematic approach, methods of comparative law, specific sociological research, historical, logical, statistical, etc.

The chapter is prepared on the basis of previous scientific developments of the author, as well as the current legislation of the United States of America. The following laws were studied: Truth in Lending Act; Electronic Fund Transfers Act; Fair Credit Reporting Act; Consumer Leasing Act; Consumer Protection Act; Equal Credit Opportunity Act; Fair Debt Collection Practices Act; Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act; Privacy of Consumer Financial Information Act; Home Mortgage Disclosure Act; Alternative Mortgage Parity Act; Code of Arbitration Procedure for Customer Conflicts – Customer Code; and Code of Arbitration Procedure for Industry Conflicts. One of the new US laws was analyzed – Arbitration Fairness Act, 2017. Data was also used from the Final Report to Congress on the use of pre-dispute arbitration clauses in consumer financial services contracts, 2015, and information resources available on the websites of financial regulators: the Federal Reserve, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Office of the Currency Comptroller, the National Administration of Credit Unions, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the Federal Agency for Housing Finance, the Financial Bureau Consumer Protection, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, and American Arbitration Association.

Methodologically, the research is based on the author's materialistic worldview, which is implemented meaningfully in a positivist approach to the scientific article. In preparing the chapter, general scientific methods were applied: formal logic, system-functional, historical, analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction; special methods: mathematical, and statistical. Also the author applied private scientific methods of jurisprudence: normative-dogmatic, method of legal and technical design, interpretation of law, and others.