Today, the combined chamber of the Criminal Court of Cassation as part of the Supreme Court is trying to solve the problem of the appellate court’s initiative in the examination of evidence, since the approaches of individual court chambers, namely the First and Third ones, differ. The purpose of this study was to identify those cases when the appellate authority is entitled to investigate the evidence proactively, without encroaching on the components of the principle prescribed in Article 22 of the Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine. The formal-logical method helped generalize that the content and form of such a review must comply with the principles of criminal proceedings, including equality before the law and the court, as well as competition between the parties (it has been proven that their absence may indicate a violation of both constitutional and convention rights), freedom in presenting their evidence to the court and in proving their persuasiveness before the court. The results of the deductive method helped formulate the following theses: the legislator, understanding the equality of procedural rights not as their uniformity, normalizes it in the Criminal Procedural Code as equality in terms of the possibilities of exercising the granted rights; the legislator also determines such equality of rights from the functions that a certain participant in criminal proceedings is endowed with. The combination of prosecution, defence, and justice in one guise contradicts the adversarial nature of the judicial procedure. The study revealed that the passivity of the parties forces the court to choose its activity within the limits of the function of justice defined for it, and its initiative is aimed at examining the evidence to make a legal, well-founded, and fair decision. It is proved that these features of judicial proceedings are a priori inherent in the appeal review, along with its inherent features, including the determination of the amount of evidence to be examined, as well as compliance with the limits of judicial review, which are normalized by Article 404 of the Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine. It was found that the initiative of the court of appeal to examine evidence and their further investigation in this court is permissible in situations where such evidence became known after the adoption of the appealed court decision. Compliance with this rule will protect the court from possible violations of the requirements of Article 22 of the Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine, and scientific developments in this area are designed, among other things, to pave the way for the unity of judicial practice through doctrinal recommendations.

No abstract

The purpose of the paper is to determine a content of the standard of proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” (SP “BRD”) in the ECHRcase law and Ukrainian criminal proceedings by defining the criteria that characterize it. The subject is the SP “BRD”, doctrine of Ukraine and case-law, including its criticism by the individual judges of the ECHR and Ukrainian scholars. The research methodology includes the methods of analysis, the method of synthesis, the methods of deduction and induction, comparative-legal method, systematic and formal-legal methods. The results of the study. The acceptability of the SP “BRD” in the Ukrainian criminal proceedings is substantiated, in particular, its compliance with the purpose of criminal procedural proof. Practical implication. The criteria which characterize the SP “BRD” in the ECHR’s and SC’s case law are highlighted.

No abstract

Keywords: litigation, intellectual property law, High Court of Intellectual Property,European Union law Analysis of the legal and organizational supportfor the establishment of the High court of intellectual property revealed a scientificproblem regarding the lack of implementation of the constitutional provision accordingto which higher specialized courts may act in accordance with the law, the absenceof the Law of Ukraine «On the High Court of Intellectual Property» proceduralnorms that should ensure the activities of this court to hear cases on intellectualproperty rights.The purpose of the article is to analyze the key legal and organizational issues ofthe creation of IP-court, the main provisions of the draft special law on this court,identify gaps in procedural law, and develop proposals for their content.To achieve this goal, the history and main problems of the establishment and operationof IP-court, international experience of this judicial body, the draft Law ofUkraine «On the High Court of Intellectual Property», some provisions of legal acts ofthe European Union.The main theoretical and practical problems that actualize the urgency of the beginningof IP-court activity are formulated. It is noted that in view of the Europeanintegration vector of Ukraine's legal system, the administration of justice will belargely conditioned by legal acts of the European Union, so it is advisable to providethis court with procedural tools inherent in EU law.It is concluded that the creation and operation of IP-Court is due to the deepening ofeconomic globalization, dynamic development of technological innovation, which in thecase of integration of the Court into the international justice system will lead to internationalizationand openness of intellectual property protection in the European space.