title: The constitutionalisation of private law: Comparative analysis
metadata.name: dc.contributor.author
metadata.value: Kornilina, Polina V.
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.accessioned
metadata.value: 2024-06-04T21:34:25Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.available
metadata.value: 2024-06-04T21:34:25Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.issued
metadata.value: 2024-03
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.citation
metadata.value: Kornilina P. V. 2024. The constitutionalisation of private law: Comparative analysis. Pravovedenie 68 (1): 128–150. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu25.2024.107 (In Russian)
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.identifier.other
metadata.value: https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu25.2024.107
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.uri
metadata.value: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/45536
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.description.abstract
metadata.value: This article is divided into four parts. The first part discloses the definition of constitutionalisation
  of private law, which means the influence of fundamental (constitutional) human rights on
  private law. The second part is devoted to the analysis of the key issue related to the topic of
  constitutionalisation of private law — how and to what extent fundamental (constitutional) human
  rights influence private law. In this regard, the four models of private law constitutionalisation
  identified in comparativism and the pro/contra arguments for each of them are examined.
  The third part of the article examines which of these models is embodied in foreign legal orders
  (in particular, Germany, the Neatherlands, Canada, South Africa and the UK). The author
  concludes that the most widespread is the model of indirect influence of fundamental human
  rights on private law. The fourth part of the article provides a comparative legal analysis of the
  application of the indirect model of constitutionalisation. This model identifies two approaches
  that characterise the attitude of foreign lawmakers to human rights provisions in different ways.
  The first approach, the “strong” indirect model, assumes that human rights provisions enshrine
  rights that constitute binding rules. This approach is represented in particular in the UK. The
  second, the “weak” indirect model, views human rights provisions as enshrining values and
  being principles to be taken into account alongside other circumstances. This approach is represented
  in particular in Germany.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.language.iso
metadata.value: ru
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.publisher
metadata.value: St Petersburg State University
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.relation.ispartofseries
metadata.value: Pravovedenie;Volume 68; Issue 1
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: publicization of private law
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: constitutionalization of private law
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: privatization of human rights
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: human rights
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: horizontal relations
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Drittwirkung
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.title
metadata.value: The constitutionalisation of private law: Comparative analysis
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.type
metadata.value: Article
metadata.lang: en_GB
resources.filename: 07.pdf
resources.url: https://dspace.spbu.ru/bitstream/11701/45536/1/07.pdf
resources.format: Adobe PDF
resources.size: 741,63 kB