The aim: Is to determine the features of legal liability for violations in the field of clinical trials of medicine remedies and justification of proposals to strengthen the protection of participants' interests in clinical trials through the use of various types of such liability. Materials and methods: The authors used the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) on medical research, international and national regulations, and publications of scholars in the field of medical law. The research was carried out on the basis of a systematic approach using the methods of dialectical and formal logic, general scientific and special legal research methods. Conclusions: In order to properly ensure the legal protection of public interests, as well as the rights and interests of research subjects and other entities involved in their implementation, the authors argue the need to use different types of legal liability.

No abstract

The study highlights the dynamics of legislative changes and the current state of legal regulation of administrative and criminal liability for violations of quarantine rules. The shortcomings of the relevant legislative provisions were revealed, in particular, a conclusion was made about the violation of the principle of system-legal coherence of administrative and criminal legislation. Thus, there are issues about the delimitation of the provisions of the administrative provided in the Art. 44-3 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses and criminal offenses provided in the Art. 325 of the Criminal Code (in terms of such consequences as the threat of harm, specified in the part 1 of the Article 325 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine). In addition, there is an excessive severity of sanctions in the Art. 44-3 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses and their incompatibility with the sanctions of the Art. 325 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. In the context of the settled case law of the European Court of Human Rights the fine under the part 1 of the Art. 443 of the Code of Administrative Offenses based on its size and subject to appointment may be recognized as corresponding to a criminal offense within the meaning of the Art. 7 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Another drawback of the legislation is the lack of enshrining a criminal offense for violating quarantine regulations. On the basis of the conducted research it is offered to make changes to norms of the Art. 44-3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses and the Art. 325 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine in order to optimally regulate legal responsibility for violation of sanitary rules and regulations for the prevention of infectious diseases and mass poisoning (Article 325 of the Criminal Code), as well as quarantine rules (the Art. 44-3 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses). The main task of such changes is to construct a consistent chain of normatively established offenses in the field of compliance with quarantine rules (administrative offense - criminal offense – non-grave offense – grave offense) with adequate and proportionate responsibility for their commission.

The article examines the importance of constitutional principles for the development of criminal law. The main directions of application of the principles of criminal law in the criminal legislation of Ukraine are investigated. It is determined that the principles of the Criminal Law of Ukraine include the main provisions established by law or derived directly fromit, provide a clear description of the content of this branch of law and are used in the legislative and law enforcement activities of the state bodies. Using dialectical and historical methods, the general law principles of Criminal Law are analyzed. Thecontradiction problems of some criminal law institutes with the constitutional principles are revealed using the comparative method and the methods of analysis and synthesis. The conclusion focuses on the need to define the criminal procedural principles as a fundamental rule of conduct of the criminal process and the court, which permeates all stages of the process, based on the procedural coercion of the State, and which aims to guarantee obtaining suitable and admissible evidence and the performance of the functions of criminal proceedings in general.

Effective counteraction to tax evasion is possible only through the use of a variety of measures, including criminal law ones, the application of which requires knowledge of existing schemes and ways of committing such offenses. The article substantiates that despite the lack of the direct reference to the method of deliberate tax evasion, fees (compulsory payments) in the disposition of Art. 212 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, it should be recognized as an independent structural element of the criminal law characteristics of this crime. Scientific approaches to the classification of methods of deliberate tax evasion, fees (compulsory payments) have been considered and the most common types of practices have been identified. It has been stated that the tax evasion methods are constantly being improved and modified, which makes it impossible to provide a comprehensive scientific classification of them. Arguments in favor of the inappropriateness of foreseeing a closed list of tax evasion methods in the law on criminal liability have been given.The distinctive features of the method, which include being cumulative, fraudulent and highly organized, have been distinguished. The conclusion is made about the different impact of the used methods of tax evasion on the severity of the committed criminal offense, which should be taken into account when selecting the most effective criminal law measures to the offenders. It is emphasized that knowledge of tax evasion methods will eliminate the existing deficiencies in the national tax system and legislation, which create the conditions for such socially dangerous activities, and thus help to minimize the risks of encroachment on this area.