Search

Modern legislation does not contain a clear definition of the concept of “legal liability”. This is due to the presence of many author's points of view and opinions, where the definitions differ in meaning, and also have a wide range of embedded meanings. This situation leads to an ambiguous understanding or to an unjustified expansion of the interpretation due to the unjustified association of legal responsibility with other similar social and legal concepts and phenomena. As a result, there are discrepancies in law enforcement practice. The article considers the shortcomings of the concept of a single legal liability, justifies the impossibility of combining positive and negative liability. Due to the fact that the legal literature has repeatedly concluded that it is necessary to conduct additional theoretical research to solve this problem, the author made an attempt to rethink the traditional view in this matter. In addition to general scientific methods of cognition, broader theoretical approaches to understanding the phenomenon of responsibility are proposed. First, responsibility is considered as a functional characteristic of the interaction of the elements that form its semantic content. Secondly, the concept is studied from the standpoint of dimensionality, i.e., from the point of view of the ability of a concept to have multiple values (dimensions), depending on the number of selected keywords that are included in the definition of the concept. Thus, the definition of legal responsibility, on the example of criminal responsibility, is considered at two levels of abstraction: at the first level as a measure of responsibility; at the second-as the relationship between punishment and crime, which act as a fixed act (fact) or committed action. Based on the conducted structural research, the author's definition is formulated, which allows combining the main number of existing points of view and opinions on the definition of liability into a single principle (rule) of legal liability. For the first time, the concept of legal responsibility is considered as a logical and mathematical model that allows interpreting the legal concept based on the provisions of differential calculus. From a practical point of view, the use of extended methodological approaches should serve to organize various opinions into a single semantic understanding of legal responsibility. In the context of the widespread digitalization of law, the proposed methodology allows creating formalized structures of derived concepts used in various branches of law.

The article discusses the issues of historical validity of creating a collective subject of law in the form of a legal entity construction. The dual nature of a legal entity as a legal fiction and as a subject of legal relations is shown, which also determines the specificity of the liability of a legal entity and the grounds for its occurrence. This is especially true for such a reason as the presence of guilt, because by virtue of the artificial nature of the legal structure of a legal entity, the rules for determining its guilt differ from the rules applicable to an individual. The risks of ineffective punishment of individuals hiding behind the "screen" of an artificial subject of law are analyzed; use of a legal entity as an instrument for committing unlawful acts by individuals. A comparison is made of the features of holding a legal entity liable for committing acts in civil and public law spheres, as well as measures of this responsibility. The ideas on the possibility of a criminal procedure investigation of offenses of legal entities are considered, on the categorization of types of administrative responsibility and the amount of administrative fines in relation to legal entities.

The article discusses the issues of historical validity of creating a collective subject of law in the form of a legal entity construction. The dual nature of a legal entity as a legal fiction and as a subject of legal relations is shown, which also determines the specificity of the liability of a legal entity and the grounds for its occurrence. This is especially true for such a reason as the presence of guilt, because by virtue of the artificial nature of the legal structure of a legal entity, the rules for determining its guilt differ from the rules applicable to an individual. The risks of ineffective punishment of individuals hiding behind the "screen" of an artificial subject of law are analyzed; use of a legal entity as an instrument for committing unlawful acts by individuals. A comparison is made of the features of holding a legal entity liable for committing acts in civil and public law spheres, as well as measures of this responsibility. The ideas on the possibility of a criminal procedure investigation of offenses of legal entities are considered, on the categorization of types of administrative responsibility and the amount of administrative fines in relation to legal entities.