Search

Copyright of Anali Pravnog Fakulteta u Beogradu is the property of University of Belgrade, Faculty of Law and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article provides a biographical overview of the life and work of Mihailo Konstantinović, professor at the University of Belgrade Faculty of Law and corresponding member of the Yugoslav Academy of Arts and Sciences. This contribution covers his education, university and scientific career, political engagement, work on legislation and in professional associations. The article reflects on the contribution of Mihailo Konstantinović to Serbian legislation and jurisprudence and the recognition he deserved, as well as on the controversies of his life and work, concluding that a more detailed study of his character and work is undoubtedly necessary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper addresses the legal measures regarding vaccination against smallpox in the Principality of Serbia in the 1830s-1840s. The main focus is on two normative acts - Rules for the inoculation of pox of 1839 and a Supplement to these Rules of 1842. Relying on archive material, the paper strives to show both the normative content of these acts (including a comparison with the Austrian regulations of 1836), as well as the circumstances in which they were passed and their application in practice. Particular attention is paid to the main obstacles to effective vaccination - distrust and fear of the procedure among the general population and insufficient available medical staff - and steps that were taken to overcome these difficulties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper addresses the legal measures regarding vaccination against smallpox in the Principality of Serbia in the 1830s--1840s. The main focus is on two normative acts -- Rules for the inoculation of pox of 1839 and a Supplement to these Rules of 1842. Relying on archive material, the paper strives to show both the normative content of these acts (including a comparison with the Austrian regulations of 1836), as well as the circumstances in which they were passed and their application in practice. Particular attention is paid to the main obstacles to effective vaccination -- distrust and fear of the procedure among the general population and insufficient available medical staff -- and steps that were taken to overcome these difficulties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper analyses the regulations of medieval Serbian law that were directed against various forms of behaviour that could be considered as corruption. The majority of these rules is to be found in church law, mostly in the canon regulations of the Nomocanon of Saint Sava and the Abbreviated Syntagma of Matthew Blastares - both of which acts were comprised of legal transplants from the Rhomean (Byzantine) Empire, containing mostly canon rules of the holy fathers of the Church and of the Ecumenical Councils - and are mostly (though not exclusively) directed against the sin of simony. Still, Serbian rulers have also brought regulations on this subject, expanding upon the canon law regulations in their charters and Dushan's Code. Regulations against corruption of the secular officials are present no sooner than Dushan's codification. They are mostly focused on punishing the corruption of judges and court officials (pristavs), but being unsusceptible to bribery is also pointed out by the law as one of the necessary qualities that all government officials should possess. Finally, the manner in which corruption of secular power is regulated (no rules before Dushan's time, mostly focusing on the newly introduced general judges, sometimes prohibited with what seems like a lex imperfecta) implies that the matter was previously addressed by customary law, the contents of which, regretably, remain unknown today. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]