The scientific research is devoted to the problematic issues of force majeure circumstances as the ground for release from the liability in the economic sphere. The aim of the article is to represent the main peculiarities of force majeure circumstances in the modern socio- economic conditions. The definition, features and specialties of application of force majeure clause are thoroughly studied. As well as that the division between force majeure and superior force circumstances is provided. The special attention is paid to the specifics of release from economic liability due to COVID-19. In the survey the authors analyse the possibilities of application of force majeure clause in the conditions of the world pandemic situation. The authors suggest an efficient algorithm of actions while conducting of economic activity in the conditions of force majeure circumstances. In the article it is highlighted that the terms of superior force and force majeure circumstances are not strictly defined in the legislation. However, this fact does not prevent to consider these events according to such their features as extraordinary and exceptional nature defined in the legal acts. While conducting the research following methods were used, namely the dialectical method, the method of systematic-structural analysis, comparative method, as well as other methods and scientific approaches. The results of the survey are of crucial importance for practice and theory as it provides deep understanding of the nature of force majeure circumstances. The research conclusions stipulate the main rules of application of force majeure clause while closing and execution of commercial contracts. The article provides the readers with the essence of force majeure circumstances, allowing scholars and practitioners to understand the particularities of force majeure circumstances in various situations, namely in the condition of COVID-19. As a result of this the survey becomes even more important as it may act as a legal guideline for participants of commercial relations facing the necessity of adapting and adjusting their economic activity to modern conditions.

The article is devoted to the scientific analysis of legal nature of recommendation clarifications of Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine. The detailed attention is paid to the thorough investigation of provisions of Recommended Clarifications of Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine No. 39-pp August 08th, 2016 that defines the legal approaches of Anti monopoly Committee, which are recommended to apply by its official bodies while defining of fines for violation of legislation on protection of economic competition, including protection from unfair competition, in order to ensure the legal certainty and predictability of application of legal provisions. On the basis of scientific research, the conclusion is made that recommended clarifications of Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine by their legal nature are the acts of common regulative force that are not the legislative acts, they also cannot create new legal provisions, they belong to the so called “soft law” by means of which the uniformity of interpretation and uniform rules for realization of legal provisions are ensured. The importance of recommendation as interpretation of legal provisions is highlighted, their place in the regulation of legal relations is defined. The main purpose of recommendations is to form the legal opinion of state authority abot the content and the order of execution of legal provisions. The authors make a conclusion that withdrawal of Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine from its own legal position as to the practice of fine calculation, that is prescribed in recommended clarifications, provides the possibility to talk about the violation of one of the major principle of law — the principle of legal certainty. The proper realization of discretional competence is based on the compliance with the requirements of legality and adequacy of law enforcement decisions of empowered officials. With the purpose of improvement of current legislation, it is proposed to approve the Methodology for calculating the amount of fines by the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine for violation of the legislation on protection of economic competition. The adoption of such Methodological guidance for calculation of fines will increase the efficiency of national regulative provisions and goes completely in line with the provisions of Association Agreement between the European Union and Ukraine.

The provisions of Article 7 of the Code of Ukraine on Bankruptcy Proceedings on determination of the rules of concentration of disputes in bankruptcy proceeding were studied. As well as that it was proved that these legal provisions could be applied to property and non-property disputes. It is stated that the case taken by the court for consideration in accordance with the rules of subject-matter jurisdiction due to the rules of Article 7 of the Code of Ukraine on Bankruptcy Proceedings should be considered by this court even if during the consideration of the case it fall under the jurisdiction of another court. In case of closure of the bankruptcy proceeding the disputes with the debtor should be still considered by the judge to whom these disputes had been transferred in accordance with the law. Such conclusions are supported by the court practice. The effectiveness and expediency to consider in the bankruptcy proceeding economic and other disputes were emphasized. It was highlighted that the Code of Ukraine on Bankruptcy Proceedings did not clearly define all the procedural issues of the procedure of recognition of cross-border bankruptcy proceeding, for instance, as to the priority of procedures in such bankruptcy cases, that was opened in the Ukrainian and foreign courts; about participants of such procedure; about legal procedures that must be applied in such bankruptcy cases. In the same vein in national legislation it is not defined what is the legal order of satisfaction of creditors’ claims in cross-border insolvency procedure. This problem has to be solved on the legislative level. While fulfilling of this legislative gap the rules of the Article 32 of UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency may be taken into account. As was proposed, in the absence of international treaties of Ukraine the decisions of foreign states in bankruptcy cases should be recognized on the territory of Ukraine on the reciprocity principle, unless otherwise provided by law

No abstract

Діна Зятіна, канд. юрид. наук, доцент кафедри господарського права і процесу Національного університету «Одеська юридична академія» ДОКАЗИ І ДОКАЗУВАННЯ В ГОСПОДАРСЬКОМУ ПРОЦЕСІ: НОВІТНЯ ПРАКТИКА КАСАЦІЙНОГО ГОСПОДАРСЬКОГО СУДУ Стаття присвячена аналізу новел чинного Господарського процесуального кодексу України щодо доказування та доказів через дослідження практики Касаційного господарського суду у складі Верховного Суду. У статті розглядаються новітні положення господарського процесу щодо обов'язку доказування, підстав звільнення від доказування, ознак доказів та порядку їх витребування господарським судом. Також приділено увагу особливостям показань свідків, висновків експертів, визначено можливість відхилення доказів у господарському процесі. Ключові слова: докази, доказування, господарський процес, практика Верховного Суду, звільнення від доказування, показання свідків, судова експертиза, висновок експерта у галузі права. Ключевые слова: доказательства, доказывание, хозяйственный процесс, практика Верховного Суда, освобождение от доказывания, показания свидетелей, судебная экспертиза, вывод эксперта в сфере права.The article is devoted to the scientific analyses of new provisions of Economic Procedural Code of Ukraine about evidences and proving process by means of studying of Cassation economic court in the composition of the Supreme Court practice. In the article new provisions of economic court procedure are considered, among which are: legal provisions about obligation of evidence submission, exceptions from proving, features of evidence and legal order of their request by economic court. As well as that, attention is paid to the peculiarities of witness testimony in economic litigation, expert conclusions, the possibility of evidence rejection is defined.