Global digitization and the emergence of Artificial Intelligence-based technologies pose challenges for all countries. The BRICS and European Union countries are no exception. BRICS as well as the European Union seek to strengthen their positions as leading actors on the world stage. At the present time, an essential means of doing so is for BRICS and the EU to implement smart policy and create suitable conditions for the development of digital technologies, including AI. For this reason, one of the most important tasks for BRICS and the EU is to develop an adequate approach to the regulation of AI-based technologies. This research paper is an analysis of the current approaches to the regulation of AI at the BRICS group level, in each of the BRICS countries, and in the European Union. The analysis is based on the application of comparative and formal juridical analysis of the legislation of the selected countries on AI and other digital technologies. The results of the analysis lead the authors to conclude that it is necessary to design ageneral approach to the regulation of these technologies for the BRICS countries similar to the approach chosen in the EU (the trustworthy approach) and to upgrade this legislation to achieve positive effects from digital transformation. The authors offer several suggestions for optimization of the provisions of the legislation, including designing a model legal act in the sphere of AI.

No abstract

The article presents the significance of proper consumer protection for the stability of the financial market. It presents the basic assumptions of such protection and the direction of changes introduced as a result of the crisis of 2007 and the following years. It discusses the change of the consumer protection paradigm from the disclosure obligation to institutional and supervisory protection. It presents the adopted supervision models, including the twin peaks supervision, as well as the objectives that a proper supervision should execute in terms of financial services consumer protection.

The crisis begun in 2007 exposed the weakness of the existing regulations, revealing challenges for legislators all over the world. Financial stability started to be understood as an essential value for the proper operation of the financial market. It has become important to address the question as to how to protect financial markets from more crises, or at least alleviate their effects. The idea of supervision of a financial market has undergone thorough transformation. Particular emphasis has been placed on protecting buyers of financial services. Adequate customer protection has been recognized as a sign of trust in the market and its stability and has gained systemic importance and relevance for the European financial system. There is a growing tendency to enlarge the group of subjects eligible for special protection. it is becoming an increasingly common idea that not only consumers but all non-professional customers should be protected. The idea is becoming widespread that the weaker party to a legal transaction can be not only a consumer [natural person] but also a non-professional market entity. Such a solution is certainly appropriate. Narrowing down the ‘consumer’ to a natural person may seem artificial and out of line with market realities, not to mention the serious consequences of bad financial decisions taken by non- professional financial market participants. Another important challenge facing the modern financial market is to establish a system of institutional safeguards to ensure security for all market entities and to enforce fair play rules. However, even the best provisions of substantive law, though necessary, may prove to fall short. Therefore, there is a pressing need for strong and competent both state and international institutions duly equipped with auditing and supervisory powers to deal with the present situation. They should also have the possibility of enforcing substantive laws in a way that allows for flexible responses to any emerging threat to the protected values. The shift towards a regulatory and supervisory method of protection sets a more serious tone for the supervision model adopted for the financial market. In it, the market is responsible not only for ensuring that the supervised entities operate correctly, but also for the quality of services that they provide.