RELEVANCE AND LIMITS OF JUDICIAL RULEMAKING

Introduction: the article deals with judicial rule-making of international judicial institu- tions.Materials and Methods: the authors made a theoretical and empirical analysis of the main sources of international and European law, the court practice of international judicial institu- tions, the works of domestic and foreign schol- ars, analytical documents of international orga- nizations.Results: the article proves that judicial rule- making is well-established international prac- tice which in some cases is especially needed. Judicial rule-making is perceived by the doc- trine as a natural, necessary and legitimate legal phenomenon. In practice two forms of judicial rule-making have developed - judicial rule- making may involve interpretation of both the content of a rule of law and procedural aspects. However, international judicial institutions should strive to refrain from judicial activism and judicial rule-making. It must be borne inmind that the activities of international courts must rely on the support of national courts and the expert community.Discussion and Conclusions: according to the currently prevailing views, which made a decisive impact on the evolution of theory of state and law, judicial rule-making is insepa- rable from the daily implementation of judicial functions. Both the society and the legislator are in urgent need for it regardless of whether they admit it or not or even act against it. It is neces- sary in all cases where the legislator does not keep up with the progress of the changes caused by the rapid evolution of society and new oppor- tunities of scientific and technological progress. It is often beneficial for the legislator that the courts should have tested various approaches and have developed a well-established practice, and the application of this practice should have suggested the most rational decisions. Judicial rulemaking developed especially widely in the judiciary of international/regional integra-tion associations and within the framework of international mechanisms with elements of su- pranational coercion, first of all, in the practice of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European court of human rights. The whole system of EU law has gained the most features and basic characteristics associated with it thanks to the Luxembourg Court. These features and characteristics include positioning EU law as a system of law that differs from in- ternational and domestic law, the supremacy and direct effect, the effective jurisdictional pro- tection, strict compliance with the requirements of subsidiarity and proportionality, etc. In turn the Strasbourg Court has done a lot in order to turn positive and procedural rules of the Euro- pean Convention on human rights into “a living and developing organism.” However, periods of judicial activism have always been nothing more than a reaction to a request by the states or the need for solving tasks. The last word always belongs to major players who has always been society and legislators. When it is necessary they easily impose certain limitations on judicialrulemaking. It has already been made in respect of the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union in the legal order. However, the Minsk Court faces difficult tasks concerning the application of the EAEU law and on its formation. There- fore, it is important that the Minsk Court should determine as quickly as possible the preceden- tial nature of its decisions, the possibility of us- ing other sources of law, along with the EAEU Treaty and its secondary law, and how to tie up the national legal system of the member states in a common legal space.

judicial law-making, judicial activism, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), the European Court of Justice, the European Court of Human Rights, the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union, EU law, law of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU)

1. Алексеев С.С. Собрание сочинений в 10 т. М., 2010.

2. Алексеев С.С. Право: азбука - теория - философия. Опыт комплексного исследования. М., 1999.

3. Амплеева Е.Е., Фирсов В.В. Практика Европейского суда по правам человека по рассмотрению дел в отношении Российской Федерации (Учебное пособие). Санкт-Петербург, 2015.

4. Давыдов К.В. Проблемы квалификации длящихся и продолжаемых административных правонарушений // Правопорядок: история, теория, практика. Челябинск, 2015. № 1 (4).

5. Dashwood, A.A., Hillion, C. The General Law of EC External Relations. London, 2000.

6. Конвенция Организации Объединенных Наций по морскому праву (UNCLOS) (заключена в г. Монтего-Бей 10.12.1982) (с изм. от 23.07.1994). Официальный сайт Организации Объединенных Наций // URL: http://www. un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_r.pdf

7. Lenaerts, R., Nuffel, van P. Constitutional Law of the European Union, 2nd edition, London, 2005.

8. Lenaerts, K., Nuffel, van P., Bray, R., Cambien, N. European Union law, London, 2011.

9. Нешатаева Т.Н. Евразийская интеграция: роль Суда. М., 2015.

10. Strik, P. Shaping the Single European Market in the Field of Foreign Direct Investment. Oxford and Portland, 2014.

11. Сыченко Е.В. Некоторые аспекты эволюции Европейской конвенции по правам человека // Трудовое право в России и за рубежом. М., 2014. № 4.

12. Tridimas, T., Eeckhout, P. The External Competences of the Community and the Case-Law of the Court of Justice: Principle versus Pragmatism, Yearbook of European Law, 1994. Vol. 14.

13. Туманов В. А., Энтин Л.М. Комментарий к Конвенции о защите прав человека и основных свобод и практике её применения. М., 2002.

14. Устав Организации Объединенных Наций (Принят в г. Сан-Франциско 26.06.1945). Официальный сайт Организации Объединенных Наций // URL: http://www.un.org/ru/charter-united-nations/

15. Филарет Игумен (Булеков). «Дело о распятиях в школе»: победа здравого смысла. РПЦ: Официальный сайт Московского Патриархата, 2011 // URL: http://www.patriarchia.ru/db/text/1433483.html

16. Энтин Л.М. Европейское право. Право Европейского Союза и правовое обеспечение защиты прав человека: учебник, 3-е изд., пересм. и доп. М., 2011.

17. Энтин М.Л. Международные судебные учреждения. М., 1984.

18. Энтин М.Л. Правовые аспекты западноевропейской интеграции: Суд Европейских сообществ. М., 1987.

19. Энтин М.Л. Международные гарантии прав человека (практика Совета Европы). М., 1992.

20. Энтин М. Л. Международные гарантии прав человека: опыт Совета Европы. М., 1997.