CIVIL LIABILITY AND RELATED CATEGORIES (OBLIGATION, DUTY, PENALTY, PROTECTION OF CIVIL RIGHTS): RELATIONSHIP AND RATIO

Abstract

This paper investigates the continuing relevance, the sustained interest in the doctrine of law enforcement, controversy and ever lasting novelty of the issue of civil liability, serving as a central «direct» Institute, which invariably reveals itself in the mechanism of legal regulation of social relations that are the subject of civil rights. The article analyzes the problems of the nature and the scope of civil liability, the place and role in the process of implementation of obligations, duties, duty, sanctions, and subjective measures of protection of civil rights. Relevance, novelty and practical significance of science-based solutions of the problem of civil liability are debated widely in scientific literature, which attempts to theoretically ground the institute of denial of civil liability, as well as to describe modern civil turnover conditions dictated by the need to critically consider the liability of rules and create new conceptual approach to support and to prevent the confusion of the subjective rights of citizens with other types of defense. The article reveals the concept of civil liability in the context of concepts closely associated with it. The diversity of viewpoints on the nature of civil liability, characterizing its constitutive features, is largely due to the diversity of tasks facing the researchers. In this regard, the article on the basis of existing legislation, and scientific literature referred to in this study gives not only the analysis of the nature, characteristics, conditions of the onset of civil liability, but also reveals the inherent characteristics associated with certain categories (duties, obligations, sanctions, coercion, subjective measures of protection of civil rights), and constitutive features, collectively characterized by not only their nature and purpose but also by a normal and stable operation of civil circulation. It should be noted that the government coercion and its forced character are the features of any legal norm concerning sanctions, but not every sanction is a measure of legal liability. In the article it is justified by a broad understanding of civil liability. In this case, it is not about sides or aspects of civil liability, but rather about various forms of its realization: negative as well as positive. Of fundamental importance is the difference between the concepts of liability, responsibility and obligation. Since the basis of occurrence is based on different legal facts, insofar identification of liabilities and obligations, on the one hand and responsibility on the other, has been unacceptable. It should be emphasized that all commitments, without exception, are proprietary in nature. It seems that in recent years, the theory of causing is gaining more and more recognition and is being distinctly expressed especially in international legal acts and acts of private law codification. The point of the matter is that responsibility is a forced recovery of an existing debt, including for claims and forfeit. In this, the debt collection itself does not require the proof of fault and establishing of a debtor. Non fulfilment by the debtor of his duties for any reason is enough. The concepts of «sanction» and «responsibility» have subordinating and not coordinating nature. The first is wider than the second. Measures of civil liability are defined in the article as a special kind of sanctions, in practice characterized by the possibility of occurrence of mainly negative consequences for the offender that apply for the breach of duty (but not excluding a positive form of realization of civil liability and therefore the consequences of a positive nature). It is proposed to distinguish between static and dynamic (under application) civil liability.