Ðóñ Eng Cn Translate this page:
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate
Library
Your profile

Back to contents

Politics and Society
Reference:

Selednikova, O.N. Features of mortgage as a preventive measure of material nature.

Abstract: The article deals with the problematic issues related to the legal regulation and practical implementation of such preventive measures in the criminal process as mortgage. Particular attention is paid to the specifi cs of the implementation of this measure and the associated complexity of its legislative support due to proprietary nature mortgage. In particular, the article includes opinions of different scientists about what kind of property can be included in the subject of mortgage, with the result that it became possible to highlight the key criteria as an ease of expropriation, the possibility of long-term storage, ease of valuation, the immutability of the cost over the long period of time. Authors substantiates the inappropriateness of use real estate as collateral in a criminal trial due to the complexity of legal procedures for its expropriation and the high probability of civil disputes. The article raises the question of the possibility of the mortgagor to abandon previously adopted commitments and demand the return of collateral. It is noted that as the reason of failure of the collateral requirements and its return shall be accepted only valid reasons related to the behavior of the accused (suspect) or with the onset of the objective circumstances of the properties that do not allow the depositor to control the conduct of the accused (suspect).


Keywords:

studies of law, mortgage, defendant, suspect, investigation, relationships, money, securities, coercion, alienation


This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article

This article written in Russian. You can find original text of the article here .
References
1. Bulatov B.B., Nikolyuk V.V., Tsokolova O.I. Mery presecheniya v ugolovnom protsesse: Uchebno-praktiches-
2. koe posobie. M.: VNII MVD Rossii, 2005.
3. Bulatov B.B., Nikolyuk V.V. Ugolovnyy protsess zarubezhnykh stran. Omsk, 1999.
4. Vershinina S.I. Nekotorye voprosy pravovoy reglamentatsii zaloga kak mery presecheniya // Pravovye
5. formy i effektivnost' dokazyvaniya po ugolovnym delam. Samara, 1996.
6. Velichko A.V. Pravovoe regulirovanie primeneniya zaloga kak mery presecheniya v ugolovnom protsesse.
7. M., 2001.
8. Kistyakovskiy A. O presechenii obvinyaemomu sposobov uklonit'sya ot sledstviya i suda. SPb., 1868.
9. Manaev Yu.V., Posnik V.S., Smirnov V.V. Primenenie mer presecheniya sledovatelem. Volgograd, 1976.
10. Mikhaylov V.A. Primenenie zaloga v rossiyskom ugolovnom protsesse. Omsk, 1993. S. 142.
11. Mikhaylov V.A.. Ugolovno-protsessual'nye mery presecheniya v sudoproizvodstve Rossiyskoy Federatsii.
12. M., 1997.
13. Petrukhin I.L. Neprikosnovennost' lichnosti i prinuzhdenie v ugolovnom protsesse.
14. Peshkov M.A. Mera presecheniya – zalog: Pravovoy opyt sudov SShA // Zakonnost'. 1998. ¹12.
15. Rudnev V. Zalog v Rossii, «beyl» v SShA: sravnitel'nyy analiz // Rossiyskaya Yustitsiya, 1998, ¹4.
16. Trunov I.L., Trunova L.K. Mery presecheniya v ugolovnom protsesse. SPb., 2003.