The creation of international financial-industrial groups (the FIGs) within the BRICS countries is one of the ways of technological development. Such groups can be created on the basis of intergovernmental and other international agreements. They can accumulate state support and direct it to the development in priority sectors. It is necessary to take into account the negative experience of the creation and functioning of the FIGs within the Commonwealth of Independent States (the CIS). Specifically, it is necessary to clarify the legal status of the FIGs, draft a standard international instrument on the creation of international FIGs, grant FIGs the rights of legal entities under national laws of the contracting states, and provide them with certain tax benefits. The main legal form of international FIGs could be a holding company with a powerful parent (head) company which would own shares in subsidiaries located in the BRICS countries.

The article considers the problems of regulating corporate ESG reporting according to international standards in the BRICS countries. It defines the main international agreements and standards adopted on corporate ESG reporting issues, and analyzes the specifics and features of their implementation at the national legal level, as well as in the context of international cooperation. It considers the features and specifics of national legal regulation and interaction of the BRICS countries in the implementation of general principles of corporate ESG reporting in the context of the sustainable development agenda. The provisions of international and domestic national law are compared, a conclusion is made about the need to unify standards at the level of interstate cooperation of the BRICS countries, the formation of special interstate mechanisms for coordinating ESG reporting, the development of universal standards that take into account the specifics of the BRICS association. 

The article examines the problem of the relationship between the “new generation” and “old generation” bilateral investment treaties among the BRICS member countries. It is noted that most of the bilateral agreements are so-called “old generation” agreements. Such agreements are generally unbalanced, that is, they impose obligations only on the state receiving the investment, and grant rights to foreign investors. Investment treaties often limit the regulatory powers of states, especially in areas such as health and environmental protection.

The “new generation” treaties provide for investors’ obligations in relation to business, human rights, environmental protection; protect the state’s right to exercise regulatory powers. Some treaties include a mechanism for settling investment disputes, but require, first of all, the exhaustion of local legal remedies before arbitration and strict deadlines for referring a dispute to arbitration. It is noted that Russia needs to reform its investment treaties by including in them, in particular, provisions to limit the use of the “umbrella clause”, a ban on the use of most-favored-nation treatment for the settlement of investment disputes; measures limiting the rights of foreign investors that the recipient state has the right to take when there is a threat to the security and sovereignty of the state, and which cannot be classified as illegal expropriation. 

The creation and organization of the functioning of alternative payment systems in modern conditions is considered as a possible solution to overcome modern challenges, the crisis of financial relations. Modern challenges arising in the sphere of international trade turnover and economic relations in general, entail discussions on the feasibility of using new methods of settlements, the use of cryptocurrencies, digital financial assets in crossborder relations. Payment systems in the designated context play a critical infrastructural role, ensuring the stability of international economic relations, in particular cross-border transactions. At the same time, the legal basis for the functioning of a particular international payment system must take into account the specifics of the national legislation of the member states of the system in terms of acceptable methods of payment, means of payment, administration of payment systems, etc. Comprehensive activities to harmonize the legal systems of the BRICS member states, legal support for the functioning of the payment system and cross-border settlements within BRICS must be carried out in parallel with or even ahead of the technological and infrastructural processes for launching the system. 

This article discusses the specifics of applying the Vienna Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods of 1980 in the BRICS countries. More recently, new countries have joined the BRICS. The author set herself the task of examining this issue within the framework of the new composition of the BRICS countries.

It was possible to analyze the national contractual law of some BRICS countries on supply issues, namely, Egypt, Russia, China, Brazil and other ones, compare them with the Vienna Convention of 1980, identify similarities and differences. To study various reservations to the Vienna Convention of 1980, which were made by a number of BRICS countries when ratifying this international treaty. And most importantly, to analyze study the specifics of regulating international sale contracts concluded by counterparties from a variety of BRICS countries, both participants and non-participants of the Vienna Convention of 1980. 

The article examines the main conflict-of-laws principles and norms enshrined in the national sources of the Arab states that are members of the BRICS. The features of the intra-industry codification of conflict-of-laws rules conducted in Egypt and the United Arab Emirates are highlighted, and the problems of conflict-of-laws regulation of private law relations in Saudi Arabia are indicated. Taking into account the role of Islam in the development of the legal systems of Arab countries, the article notes the influence of Islamic law on the conflict of laws of the Arab BRICS member states. Some positions in the legal doctrine of the Arab countries on the further development of conflict of laws and the codification of its norms were also touched upon.

The legal vector of development of the BRICS union undoubtedly concerns regulatory regulation in the field of energy. Where, proper, and include transactions of purchase and sale of hydrocarbons at wholesale prices. The economic value, volatility of this segment of the market of common energy resources today suffer serious burdens. Let us mention here both sanctions pressure and the resulting tightening of export controls. In the complicated environment, it is important for the BRICS member states to maintain demand for hedging. Then crisis interventions are circumvented without the regulator involving its own assets. Interim payments on derivatives allow you to prevent the risks of a fall in the insurance premium, below the level of the insurance contract. The option too relates strictly to certain time intervals. Nevertheless, payouts to its holder accrue regularly. The options embedded in the deposit, altogether, change for the lending institution the volumes of cash flows. 

The article examines the category of “the child’s best interest” in the context of private international law, with an emphasis on the problems of qualification and application of this principle in cross-border disputes. The author analyzes the evolution of the concept of the “best interest of the child” in international legal acts, such as the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child of 1989, as well as its reflection in the national legislations of various countries. Particular attention is paid to the difficulties that arise in defining and applying this principle in cases where the interests of the child are affected by conflicting jurisdictions, differences in legal systems and cultural traditions.

The paper examines key aspects related to the qualification of a child’s best interest in the context of cross-border disputes, including custody, adoption, alimony obligations, and the protection of minors’ rights in international family conflicts. The author highlights the main problems faced by courts and law enforcement agencies in determining the best interest in the absence of a single international standard.

Based on the analysis of judicial practice and doctrinal approaches, possible ways to improve legal regulation in this area are proposed, including strengthening international cooperation, harmonizing legislation, and developing universal criteria for determining the best interest of a child in cross-border disputes. The article is of interest to experts in the field of private international law, family law, as well as to anyone who deals with the protection of children’s rights in an international context. 

This article discusses the problems and prospects of recognizing and enforcing anti-suit injunctions issued in accordance with Article 248.2 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in BRICS member states. It has been revealed that the norms of this article have an extraterritorial feature since they extend their effect beyond the borders of the state in which the dispute is being considered. The author notes that the recognition and enforcement of Russian anti-suit injunctions can potentially be carried out by BRICS member states taking into account the broad interpretation of international treaties on legal assistance that do not contain a mandatory requirement on the finality of the judicial acts submitted. The author believes that the recognition and enforcement of anti-suit injunctions on the territory of BRICS member states may depend on the will of the requesting party and be declarative. The author suggests that international treaties on legal assistance concluded by the Russian Federation with BRICS member states explicitly provide for the possibility of mutual recognition and enforcement of injunctions. In addition, in the opinion of the author, it seems possible to mutually recognize and enforce such acts based on the principle of international comity that has developed in relations between the Russian Federation and other BRICS member states. 

The medieval lex mercatoria concept is experiencing a renaissance in the context of the global spread of information and communication technologies and the scaling of cyberspace. Lex mercatoria is considered in the work through the prism of cyberspace, which is characterized by community building. Lex mercatoria is considered in the article through the prism of cyberspace, which is characterized by community building. This led to the conceptualization of lex communitas as a “community law” and its cyberspace subsystems.

Lex communitas is considered as a modern historical form of lex mercatoria, mediating the non-governmental rulemaking of international professional communities. At the same time, many professional communities are forming today around various digital solutions, services, platforms, etc. The paper examines such cyberspace subsystems of lex communitas as lex informatica, lex suggestum or “platform law”, lex cryptographia. Lex communitas concept correlates with how the modern system of resolving crossborder private law disputes is also being transformed, increasingly moving to an out-of-court level: from international commercial arbitration to platform and decentralized systems.

The paper attempts to identify the features of the current stage of lex mercatoria development, the quantitative composition of which is rapidly multiplying in parallel with the ongoing qualitative changes in the system of regulation of cross-border private law relations mediated by cyberspace. 

Russia and Ethiopia are members of BRICS and consider intellectual property rights turnover as an important area of cooperation. The cumulation of norms of national legal orders in the field of copyright and contract law has made it possible to establish similarities and differences in regulation. Ethiopia is not a party to international copyright agreements, but its law is largely harmonized with the core conventions (the Berne Convention of 1886 and the Universal Copyright Convention of 1952). At the same time, there are discrepancies with Russian law that must be taken into account in contractual relations between persons of the states: discrepancy in the qualification of the contract of alienation of exclusive rights; different requirements for the essential terms of the license agreement; absence of conflict of laws regulation in Ethiopia in the sphere of intellectual and contractual statuteе. Ignoring the identified problems can lead to the vulnerability of cross-border contracts on the disposal of exclusive rights — non-conclusion, conflict of conflicts, and limping relations. The absence of a conflict of laws regulation in Ethiopia makes it ineffective to choose a state court as the forum for resolving a dispute arising from a cross-border copyright transaction. There are many reasons for this, including the lack of an agreement between states on the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. Since States are parties to the 1958 New York Convention, it is advisable for parties to a transaction to choose international commercial arbitration. This will also make it possible to choose the law applicable to contractual relations and count on the recognition and enforcement of a foreign arbitration award. 

This article is devoted to the peculiarities of trademark protection in the BRICS countries. The author analyzes the peculiarities of granting trademark protection in the Russian Federation, Brazil, India, China, South Africa, Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, the United Arab Emirates and Indonesia. The BRICS countries are actively developing comprehensive cooperation, improving trademark protection systems, which contributes to the development and rapprochement of trade relations between the countries. The article examines the norms of international agreements of the BRICS countries, and analyzes the legislation in the field of trademark protection. 

It is established that the relationship between legal institutions, “public order” and “fundamentals of legal order”, is determined by F. K. Savigny through the concepts and features of imperative social norms that exclude the effect of foreign law. The formation and consolidation of these legal institutions in doctrine and legislation is studied. The imperative reasons for the coincidence of the concepts of “fundamentals of the Soviet legal order (public order)” in the Soviet period are indicated. It is noted that the foundations of legal order and public order in international private law are intersecting concepts, where the former is part of the latter. It is established that the legal template in effect in Soviet times, according to which “fundamentals of legal order” and “public order” were synonyms, is an anachronism and is not suitable for characterizing the rules enshrined in Articles 1992 and 1193 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and Article 167 of the Family Code of the Russian Federation. 

The current stage of Russian-Chinese relations calls for analysis of existing regulations in order to regulate trade and economic relations with China, which is currently a key trading partner for the Russian Federation. The article examines certain provisions of a bilateral Treaty — the General Terms and Conditions for the Supply of Goods from the USSR to China and from China to the USSR in 1990. The author formulates the conclusion that the binding or optional application of international treaties should follow from the expression of the will of States, and not from judicial practice. The author also analyzes the mechanism of application of the alternative arbitration agreement incorporated into the said bilateral Treaty specified contract, provided for in paragraph 52. The article establishes that due to the dispositivity of the General Terms and Conditions for the Supply of Goods from the USSR to China and from China to the USSR in 1990, the parties in their agreement may apply to both arbitration and state courts. And only in the absence of the said agreement the compulsory jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal should be provided for in paragraph 52 of the said bilateral Treaty. 

Based on the basic principles of the science of private international law, analysis of court practice and rules of bilateral agreement on legal assistance in civil and criminal matters, concluded between the Russia and China, the author analyzes the peculiarities of recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in China. Because of the analysis, the author concludes that China makes efforts to the simplification of the procedure of recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. This conclusion is confirmed by the introduction of relevant amendments to the Chinese Code of Civil Procedure and the adoption of clarifications and guiding decisions by the Supreme People’s Court of China. Particular attention is paid to the approach of Chinese courts to establishing the existence of reciprocity. 

The significant growth of international trade relations between the Russian Federation and the China has led to an increase in the documentary transaction volumes, in particular, such as guarantees. The article provides a comparative analysis of security obligations in accordance with Chinese and Russian law. The author analyzes the regulations and judicial comments on the application of the rules on sureties and guarantees in China. The study revealed significant differences in the legal regulation of guarantees and sureties in Russian and Chinese law, as well as recommendations for structuring guarantee transactions involving Chinese counterparties. 

Formation of a common financial market is one of the key goals of the Eurasian Economic Union. Harmonization of protecting the rights and legitimate interests of consumers of financial services is an integral part of this process. The paper provides a comparative legal analysis of the legislation of the EAEU member states in three groups of services: banking, securities market and insurance. At first glance, it seems similar in regulating, however, a deeper analysis reveals differences that are important to eliminate when creating a common financial market. A number of states do not have an institution of a financial ombudsman, while the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation have the most variable system of pre-trial protection of rights. To what extent are the legal and institutional frameworks for protecting the rights of consumers of financial services of the EAEU member states ready for the goals and objectives of the common financial market — these are the questions that the author tries to answer based on the results of the comparative legal analysis. 

The author critically evaluates the interpretation of Article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (“Categories of crimes”) by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in relation to unfinished crimes. The wording of the law that the categories of crime are determined by the maximum penalty provided for the committed act by this Code, the Constitutional The Court of the Russian Federation, in its refusal rulings on citizens ‘ complaints, without any justification, replaced “the maximum penalty provided for by the sanction of the relevant article of the Special Part of the Code with the maximum penalty provided for by the sanction of the relevant article of the Special Part of the Code”. And as for the provisions of Article 66 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on reducing the maximum penalties for any unfinished crimes relative to the maximum penalties corresponding to the article of the Special Part of the Code for completed Crimes, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation indicated that they are not subject to application in determining the category of crime.

The author believes that the category of unfinished crime should be determined based on the maximum term (size) of punishment provided for by the sanction of the article of the Special Part of the Criminal Code, using the coefficients stablished by h. h. 2 or 3 of Article 66 of the Criminal Code. 

The article discusses the need to criminalize and systematize war crimes, the need to improve Section XII of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation “Crimes against the peace and security of mankind”. The effectiveness of the fight against crimes against the peace and security of mankind, war crimes, cannot be ensured only by establishing responsibility at the interstate level. Criminalization of war crimes at the national level is an important element in the effective fight against these offenses. In the current military-political situation, it became necessary to improve Section XII of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation “Crimes against the peace and security of mankind” and include the chapter “War crimes” in it. In this chapter, it is necessary to include a number of elements of crimes, taking into account the situation in which they are committed: the situation of armed conflict. 

The article examines lawmaking as a social system that was finally formed in the leading legal orders in the twentieth century. The first stage is associated with the emergence of natural law, it was based on the ideas of philosophers and lawyers of Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome. The second stage, which began in the VII and VIII centuries, was determined by the ideas of the philosophy of rationalism, the theory of natural and inalienable human rights, the social contract, the doctrine of civil society and the rule of law, and the historical school of law. The third, the modern stage of lawmaking, is associated with the enrichment of its theory with the views of soft or moderate positivism, democratic ideas of popular lawmaking, and the formation of a systemic law-making mechanism.

The development of the law-making doctrine in Russia is analyzed, its specificity and difference from the Western tradition are shown, i.e. the connection with customary law and religious law, the development of the theory of law-making by Soviet legal science, the enrichment of law-making practice with new legal forms.

The article presents classical and modern views on lawmaking, including the use of modern technologies in lawmaking. 

The article attempts to determine the most optimal dispute resolution mechanism in the field of e-commerce within the framework of the BRICS. Based on the analysis, it is emphasized that the consideration of this category of disputes is more successfully carried out through online dispute resolution methods, the most promising of which is online arbitration today. In this regard, the article proposes to develop a unified dispute resolution procedure in online arbitration within the framework of the BRICS. In conditions when the process of forming online arbitration is not completed, and in the BRICS members there is no full-fledged legal regulation of this mechanism, it is proposed to gradually form the foundations of the dispute resolution process in online arbitration through unification, followed by their detailing using more flexible means of harmonization. 

This article is devoted to the issue of choosing the most acceptable way to determine the applicable law to an arbitration agreement. The article seems relevant, since the author analyzed the main positive and negative aspects of the existing approaches to the choice of the applicable law to an arbitration agreement in practice, and also presented a proposal to apply a new approach to its definition, which will smooth out problematic aspects and ensure a balance between the choice of the competent legal order for the arbitration agreement by the arbitration panel and the autonomy of the will of the parties. The article will be useful both for practitioners, since it contains an analysis of the latest relevant developments in terms of regulating this issue at the international and national levels, as well as testing in judicial and arbitration practices, and for the scientific community, since it broadcasts the author’s assessment of the current situation taking into account modern challenges and development trends. 

The need to intensify the efforts of the BRICS countries in the field of electronic commerce has necessitated the development and implementation of a mechanism for the recognition of foreign electronic signatures by the BRICS member countries. The analysis of national law norms of individual BRICS member countries has led to the conclusion that there are no common standards for the technical compatibility of signature certificates. The author proposes two ways of solving the problem of mutual recognition of foreign electronic signature certificates between the members of the association. The article substantiates the conclusion that the adoption of an international treaty providing for mutual recognition of foreign electronic signatures is difficult and will potentially lead to a contradiction between the norms of international and national law of the BRICS countries. In this regard, the author suggests the need to create a unified platform in public-private interactions, which would provide for common requirements for members of the association in terms of the reliability and security of electronic signatures, the procedure for verifying the validity of a foreign signature key certificate, and cooperation with leading certification centres. 

This article is devoted to one of the most complex and little-studied aspects of international private law, a special group of norms that are not subject to the general principles and rules for choosing the applicable law and act as both a “protective” and “blocking” mechanism with respect to the influence of the competent legal order — the public order clause. This article is of particular interest in connection with the author’s attempt to present a qualitatively new view on the role and essence of this mechanism, the study of the features of the application of the public order clause within the framework of this study is aimed, first of all, at presenting a real picture of the formation of this phenomenon not exclusively as a mechanism of positive law, but as a response to the needs of society and the state in protecting the unshakable foundations of life and joint activities of a particular national community. In addition, the author is convinced that in its historical development, public order has overcome several transformations and in the context of the tendency to expand the field of private law relations, which are significantly influenced by the clause on public order, the exit of this mechanism beyond the exclusive contractual legal relations, it is necessary to assert the possible transformation and refraction of the traditional private law institution under the influence of a specific sphere of legal relations, as an example, the author refers to the sphere of cross-border insolvency.