PROSECUTOR’S SUPERVISION OVER THE IMPLEMENTATION OF URBAN PLANNING LEGISLATION


Cite item

Abstract

The article deals with the problems of prosecutorial supervision over the implementation of urban planning legislation in the operation of shopping and entertainment centers. The question of the legality of use of non-residential buildings or premises as a shopping center, shopping and entertainment center, considered typical violations that require a proper legal response from the prosecutor’s office. Legal possibilities are estimated and the basic means of response of bodies of prosecutor’s office are defined. In a separate article the problem of evaluation by the prosecutor of the legality of the use of the building for a shopping center or shopping center when the building, originally built as a production, it was reconstructed without obtaining permits as planned construction changes in the object themselves did not affect structural and other characteristics of reliability and safety and do not exceed limiting parameters of permitted construction and established urban planning regulations.

About the authors

D. A. Lobachev

Department of Criminal Process and Criminalistics, Samara National Research University

Author for correspondence.
Email: grigorjewa.katerina@yandex.ru
Russian Federation

References

  1. Viktorov I. S, Zemerov N. N. Voprosy prokurorskogo nadzora za soblyudeniem zakonodatel’stva v sfere gradostroitel’noi i zhilishchnoi deyatel’nosti [Issues of prosecutorial supervision of compliance with legislation in the field of urban planning and housing activities]. Zhilishchnoe pravo [Housing Law], 2008, no. 8, pp. 26–31. Available at: http://center-bereg.ru/ j1908.html [in Russian].
  2. Bondar’ N. S., Dzhagaryan A. A. Konstitutsionalizatsiya prokurorskogo nadzora v Rossiiskoi Federatsii: problemy teorii i praktiki [Constitutionalization of prosecutor’s supervision in the Russian Federation: problems of theory and practice]. Konstitutsionnoe i munitsipal’noe pravo [Constitutional and Municipal Law], 2015, no. 5, pp. 9–23. Available at: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=23530571 [in Russian].
  3. Voronin S. A. Nadzornaya funktsiya prokuratury (teoreticheskii aspekt) [Supervisory function of the prosecutor’s office (theoretical aspect)]. Administrativnoe i munitsipal’noe pravo [Administrative and Municipal Law], 2016, no. 5, pp. 433–438. doi: 10.7256/19992807.2016.5.18667 [in Russian].
  4. Kanuntsev A. A. Prokurorskii nadzor za ispolneniem zakonov v sfere obespecheniya bezopasnosti na ob”ektakh s massovym prebyvaniem lyudei [Prosecutorial supervision of the implementation of laws in the field of security at facilities with a large stay of people]. Prokuror [Procurator], 2016, no. 2, pp. 78–82. Avaiable at: https://genproc.gov.ru/upload/iblock/88f/ Prokuror%20r2-2016_150.pdf [in Russian].
  5. Oleinik O. M. Teoreticheskie problemy obshchego nadzora prokuratury [Theoretical problems of the general supervision of the prosecutor’s office]. Zakon,
  6. , no. 3, pp. 36–Available at: https://zakon.ru/ publication/igzakon/6999 [in Russian].
  7. Shirvindt A. M., Shcherbakov N. B. O ponyatii stroenii i sooruzhenii vspomogatel’nogo ispol’zovaniya: k voprosu o tselyakh gradostroitel’nogo zakonodatel’stva i korrektnom tolkovanii zakona [On the concept of buildings and facilities of the subsidiary of use: the issue of purpose town planning legislation and correct interpretation of the law]. Imushchestvennye otnosheniya v Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Property Relations in the Russian Federation], 2016, no. 7, pp. 24–37. Available at: https:// elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=26366966 [in Russian].
  8. Sukhomlinova M. P. Rol’ organov prokuratury v obespechenii balansa chastnogo i publichnogo interesov v sfere chastnoi sobstvennosti [Role of the prosecution bodies in guarantees of the balance between private and public interests in the sphere of private property]. Aktual’nye problemy rossiiskogo prava [Actual Problems of Russian Law], 2015, no. 8, pp. 203–207. Available at: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=24190485 [in Russian].
  9. Informatsionnoe pis’mo Prezidiuma VAS RF ot 09.12.2010 № 143 Obzor sudebnoi praktiki po nekotorym voprosam primeneniya arbitrazhnymi sudami stat’i 222 Grazhdanskogo kodeksa Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Information letter of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated December 9, 2010 No. 143 Review of judicial practice on certain issues of application by arbitration courts of Article 222 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation]. Vestnik VAS RF [Bulletin of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation], 2011, no. 2, February. Available at: https://rulaws.ru/vs_rf/Informatsionnoe-pismo-Prezidiuma-VAS-RF-ot-09.12.2010-N-143 [in Russian].
  10. Postanovlenie Plenuma Verkhovnogo Suda RF № 10, Plenuma VAS RF № 22 ot 29.04.2010 «O nekotorykh voprosakh, voznikayushchikh v sudebnoi praktike pri razreshenii sporov, svyazannykh s zashchitoi prava sobstvennosti i drugikh veshchnykh prav» [Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation № 10, Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation № 22 dated 29.04.2010 «On some issues that arise in judicial practice in resolving disputes related to the protection of property rights and other property rights»]. Vestnik VAS RF [Bulletin of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation], 2010. no. 6, June. Available at: https://resheniya-sudov.ru/2010/175748 [in Russian].
  11. Opredelenie Sudebnoi kollegii po grazhdanskim delam Verkhovnogo Suda Rossiiskoi Federatsii ot 23.04.2019 № 83KG18-18 [Determination of the Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 23.04.2019 № 83-KG18-18]. Available at: https://legalacts. ru/sud/opredelenie-sudebnoi-kollegii-po-grazhdanskim-delam-verkhovnogo-suda-rossiiskoi-federatsii-ot-23042019n-83-kg18-18 [in Russian].
  12. Apellyatsionnoe opredelenie Tul’skogo oblastnogo suda ot 02.07.2018 po delu № 33-2059/2018 [Appellate decision of the Tula Regional Court dated 02.07.2018 with regard to case № 33-2059/2018] [in Russian].
  13. Apellyatsionnoe opredelenie Verkhovnogo suda Respubliki Tatarstan ot 08.02.2016 po delu № 332197/2016 [Appelate decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Tatarstan dated 08.02.2016 with regard to case № 33-2197/2016]. Available at: http://sudrf. kodeks.ru/rospravo/document/436319406 [in Russian].
  14. Pis’mo Minekonomrazvitiya RF ot 24 aprelya 2017 g. № og-d23-4974 [Letter of the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation dated April 24, 2017 № og-d23-4974]. Available at: http://economy. gov.ru/minec/about/structure/depRealty/2017300511 [in Russian].

Copyright (c) 2020 Д. А. Лобачев

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies