Legal incidents. False claims. The world's most famous legal cases Legal case example

CASE

(lat. casus) - in law:

1) an event that does not depend on the will of the person and therefore cannot be foreseen under the given conditions;

2) an accidental action, which (as opposed to intentional or careless) has external signs offense, but lacks the element of guilt and therefore does not entail legal liability. The concept of force majeure should be distinguished from force majeure;

3) a separate court case or legal situation as an example (see casuistry).

One-volume large legal dictionary. 2012

Infants and criminal punishment

Infants are innocent and are not subject to criminal punishment. But this unshakable rule was broken in 1445. The punishing sword of justice fell on a helpless baby from the family of a certain Alexis Bean, better known as Sony Bean. This person Temya made her living by killing travelers on the roads of Scotland with her wife and children. People were deprived of their lives in order to be robbed and then eaten in a cave. The bloodthirsty family lived in it for 25 years.

People were disappearing without a trace, and this eventually unsettled Scotland. King James I himself led the investigation, and a criminal family of cannibals was discovered. There were 48 criminals in total, and they were all related to each other by blood. These were siblings living intimate life together. The founder of the bloodthirsty family was Sony Bean and his wife.

The caught cannibals were sentenced to quartering. After the sentence was carried out, the bodies were burned at the stake. But the family ended up with a baby who was only 9 months old. The people's anger did not spare him either. But for the sake of objectivity, it must be said that the child was not quartered. He was strangled and burned along with his entire family. The baby turned out to be the youngest executed by court decision in the entire history of human civilization.

Multiple death sentences

Judicial incidents manifested themselves in verdicts on multiple executions of the death penalty. So in December 1924, the “Hanoverian werewolf” was sentenced to death. This is a German from the city of Hanover named Fritz Haarmann. He, being a homosexual, found young and attractive tramps at the railway station, invited them to live at his home, persuaded them to cohabitate, and then killed them. The criminal first strangled the victim, and then bit the skin on the neck of a living person and drank blood.

As the investigation established, during the period from 1918 to 1924, Fritz Haarmann brutally killed 24 people. It was assumed that there were many more victims, but only a small number of crimes could be proven. However, this was quite enough to pass a harsh1 and fair sentence. True, it turned out to be somewhat original. The court decided to subject the villain to the death penalty 24 times. The villain's head was cut off in April 1925. However, they were able to do this only once, since nature “ignored” such an unusual court decision.

The court verdict against John Gacy is also of interest. He was serial killer from Illinois (USA) and killed 33 people between 1972 and 1978. Gacy was also a homosexual, and therefore killed young men. Bloody maniac detained in December 1978. The trial of the fanatic took place in February 1980. Already on March 13, Themis handed down 11 death sentences and 22 life sentences, including each murder. In May 1994, the criminal was killed by lethal injection.

Long prison terms

Sometimes court cases involve unrealistically long prison terms. Here you can consider the example of the postman Gabriel from the city of Palma in Spain. He was brought to court for failure to comply with his job responsibilities. The postal employee did not deliver the correspondence to the addresses, but simply burned it. The reason for everything was the pathological laziness of this unfortunate worker. In a few years this labor activity they destroyed 38,427 letters.

According to Spanish law, for the deliberate destruction of important documentation, the attacker faces a prison sentence of up to 9 years. The prosecutor reacted extremely harshly to Gabriel’s misconduct and demanded a sentence of imprisonment for a period of 345,843 for the defendant. That is, for each burned letter, the prosecution asked for 9 years in prison. At first glance, all this may seem comical, but the prosecutor's office acted within the framework of the existing law.

Something similar happened in Alabama. There, in 1981, a record-breaking sentence was imposed. A certain Deuel Davis was imprisoned for 10 thousand years. With sophisticated cruelty, he killed a family of 3 people in 1976. The criminal first abused the mother and her young daughter, and then took their lives. This was the reason for such a long prison term.

In 1992, a trial took place in Milwaukee (Wisconsin) of the terrible maniac and cannibal Jeffrey Dahmer. Between 1978 and 1991, he killed and ate 17 young men. The court sentenced the terrible monster to 957 years in prison. But then God intervened. The Almighty considered it unnecessary for such a long stay on earth for a bloodthirsty maniac. In 1994, Dahmer was killed by a cellmate, beating him and causing injuries incompatible with life. The cannibal passed away six months before turning 35.

Another fanatic, David Berkowitz from Yonkers, New York, was sentenced in 1977 to 367 years in prison for 6 murders. This criminal shot young women with a pistol. When the killer was detained, he stated that a neighbor named Sam Carr pushed him to commit bloody crimes. He gave his criminal orders not personally, but through his own dog. However, the investigative authorities were able to prove that David Berkowitz is mentally healthy. Journalists nicknamed him “Son of Sam.”

Released after a long prison term

There are plenty of criminals on the planet who have been released after long prison terms. An example here is Paul Heidel. In 1912 he turned 17 years old. The young man worked in one of the hotels in New York. His duties included carrying the guests' belongings and performing other grunt work. One day, while receiving a tip from a guest, Paul Heidel saw a large sum of money from him. At night, a young man snuck into the unfortunate man’s room and strangled him with a pillow. But the killer could not find the money. He only got a few dollars.

Paul Heidel served almost 69 years in prison for committing a serious crime. He was released in 1980. He spent the rest of his days in a nursing home and died in 1987, having lived to the age of 93. This criminal served the longest prison sentence in the United States. His name was included in the Guinness Book of Records.

Rudolf Hess spent much less time in the Spandau prison walls after the Nuremberg trials. He served 40 years as a Nazi criminal. Since 1966, in a prison designed for 700 prisoners, he served his sentence alone. In August 1987, before his release, Hitler's deputy in the party committed suicide. That's what the official conclusion said, at least.

Of the women, US citizen Winnie Jud spent the longest time in prison. Back in 1931, she arrived “to the dream factory” in Los Angeles with two friends. But Hollywood met the girl unfriendly. But the friends almost immediately received episodic roles in one of the films. A bad feeling of envy flared up in Vinnie Jud’s soul. It provoked a quarrel, as a result of which the friends were killed.

After the crime was committed, the girl tried to escape, but was quickly detained. Vinnie threatened electric chair, but then the court doubted mental state the defendant. She was eventually placed in a mental hospital for criminals. The woman spent 40 long years there and was released in 1971.

Awaiting execution of death sentence

It happens that the wait for the execution of a death sentence drags on for many years. Such legal cases are typical for many countries of the world. For example, consider Japan. Sadomiche Hirosawa waited 41 years for the death penalty. He was convicted in 1948 of poisoning bank employees with a deadly poison. The criminal had a goal to steal a large amount of money. In this case, 12 people died.

The sentence passed was harsh but fair. However, the punishing sword of justice was never drawn from its sheath. The execution was postponed from year to year, and the criminal gradually grew old and, in the end, turned into a decrepit old man. It all ended with the convict dying of natural causes at the age of 94.

But for Indonesian residents Ling Tong and Tan Thuen, fate turned out a little differently. In 1962, they robbed and killed the owner of a jewelry store in Jakarta. Several days passed and the police detained the criminals. They were sentenced to death. But she had to wait a long time. Only after 25 years were the murderers executed. Justice was served only in 1987.

As can be seen from the above, judicial cases are of a diverse nature. We have only seen a small number of them. But this is quite enough to have general idea about justice and realize a simple thing: it is better not to break the laws, so that, God forbid, you do not become a hero of the Guinness Book of Records.

Yuri Syromyatnikov

Photo from portalpk.ru

On April 1, April Fool's Day was celebrated all over the world. We asked lawyers to recall funny decisions of Russian courts, as well as surprising and funny, in their opinion, situations from courtrooms. As a result, the selection included stories about a lawsuit to recognize the “absolute rightness” of Valery Zorkin, 6 million sheets of documentation, “legal doctrine” personally from Dmitry Medvedev, and much more.

Legal work is not that funny, but there is a place for humor in it, he says Pavel Katkov, senior partner of the law firm "", but immediately adds: “Although it is specific, of course.” Let's start with the April Fool's story (in every sense) that was told at the interview Valery Narezhny, advisor « »: " I can’t say for sure that it took place, but if it’s a story, it’s quite realistic.”

Winter 2010-2011 in Ivanteevka (a city in the Moscow region), municipal services did a very poor job of removing snow. The lawyer living there got tired of it, and in December he filed a lawsuit against the local management company with a request to oblige her to clear the sidewalks of snow. The judge scheduled the first hearing for the end of February, then postponed it twice, and in April she decided to reject the claim. The motive is that the defendant can no longer fulfill the demands due to changes in weather conditions.

It is difficult to confirm such stories, but for those who are especially distrustful, we have arbitration disputes. Where everything can be found on the website "Arbitration Case Files". Well, or almost everything. The only exception may be cases like the one that Valery Narezhny also reminded us of (he called it “the most famous and curious technical error of the court at the highest level”).

We are talking about a dispute between AstrakhanPassengerTrans OJSC and the tax authority (No. A06-5208/2008), which in October 2009 was to be considered by the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation. When representatives of AstrakhanPassengerTrans went to the website of the Supreme Court a week before the meeting to download the ruling on the consideration of the case, it turned out that instead of it there had already been posted ready text resolution in which the applicant of the supervisory complaint denied. The motivation was fully described and all members of the Presidium were listed. Empty place remained only in those places where the names of the representatives of the parties should have been. Cm. " ".

“Apparently, there was an inattentiveness of a specialist from the Supreme Arbitration Court, who, instead of a file with the text of the ruling on assigning the case for consideration, posted on the website a pre-prepared “fish” of the court decision,” suggests Narezhny. Judge-reporter Marina Zorina then recused herself. However, the case was still considered, and the decision made was exactly the same as in the “fish” published by chance.

We want incredible things!

YOU have already corrected the “technical error”, but in the vastness of the Ring Road there are many other interesting things that they are not going to correct. For example, the most “brilliant” thing, according to Viktor Gerbutov,partner, head of dispute resolution practice, - this is the determination of the Volgograd Region AS dated October 19, 2009 (case No. A12-21010/2009). There, the plaintiff's demands attract attention. Here is how the court itself describes them in its definition:

“LLC Stanovskoye filed a statement of claim, asking the Arbitration Court of the Volgograd Region do the incredible» . And the “incredible” lies, in particular, in the following:

- “to oblige the defendant, the Russian Federation, to comply with the requirements of its own legislation”;

- “to admit that Russia is not a rule-of-law state...”;

- “to admit that on October 29, 2004, the Chairman of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation Valery Zorkin in his public speaking was absolutely right". (The following are explanations of what exactly Zorkin was right about). “If we engage in pure security, deny the obvious, insist on our infallibility-quantity can develop into quality. And we can essentially lose not only the remnants of legal authority, but also legal personality as such. And at the same time, overall sovereignty as a whole...”- the words of the chairman of the Constitutional Court are quoted in the definition.

Holy spring

You can learn a lot from the acts of arbitration courts and about the sources of law.

For example, from the decision of the AS of St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region of 2008 (No. A56-6546/2008). This is another case from the “archive of curiosities” of Viktor Gerbutov. The dispute concerned the problems of compulsory motor liability insurance, and the court “in choosing the principles of [its] consideration” was guided "legal doctrine" of the President of the Russian Federation(then Dmitry Medvedev). It was formulated by the president, as follows from the court decision, at a ceremonial meeting in honor of the 85th anniversary of the creation Supreme Court. There Medvedev mentioned that " “legal nihilism is a powerful obstacle to the development of our state,” “disrespect for the law does not appear on its own,” and “legal culture directly depends on the quality of law and the quality of law enforcement government agencies and officials".

And in 2015, in the case of recognition of property rights No. A32-25579/2014, which she told us about Anna Zabrotskaya, Advisor and Head of Dispute Resolution Practice, St. Petersburg Office "", the AC of the Krasnodar Territory referred in its decision to Justinian's Digests. Here's what it says verbatim:

“The priority of the interests of the land owner and the service role of canals was emphasized in Roman law. Thus, in Justinian’s Digests it is stated that “the benefit of the one who drains the water should be taken into account only in the absence of damage to the one who owns the field,” “a canal cannot from open to become underground, since this deprives the owner of the land of the benefit from watering livestock and drawing water" (Digests. Book forty-three. Title XXI. 2, 3 // Property rights to land in selected fragments from Justinian’s Digest. M.: Statute, 2006. P. 615)".

Restaurant, light snacks... tights

However, reality itself often provides judges with non-standard topics for “resolution” (and reflection): everything that needs to be analyzed.

For example, says Gerbutov, back in 2002, the cassation of the North-Western District considered a rental dispute (No. A56-28425/01) about which improvements could be recognized as separable and which could not. The following verdict was returned: “The cassation court believes that of all the above, only sinks with stands and toilets with tanks are separable improvements, since their dismantling cannot affect the condition of the room in which they are installed. This is confirmed by the examination reports...”

In 2007, the capital arbitration courts in a tax dispute, we investigated an “invitation to a VIP restaurant” (No. 09AP-11892/2007-AK). The applicant argued that there was no value in it (except for the price of the paper). “It is not the invitation itself as an object that has legal significance material world(a piece of paper), and the rights that [it] provides", - stated in the act of first instance. The appeal agreed: "…invitation<…>includes the right of a person to consume snacks, alcoholic and soft drinks. The applicant transferred this property right to receive service in a VIP restaurant to his clients free of charge, therefore the tax authority came to a reasonable conclusion that there was an object of VAT taxation.”.

According to lawyers from "", in one dispute with the tax authority they represented a restaurant operator Catering. The tax authorities refused to recognize expenses for the purchase of tights for waitresses. Her position was that tights are not part of the uniform. The case continued until it became clear that the employees tax authorities Tights are also issued as uniform uniform.

The main thing is participation

Often the “blanket” is pulled over by the participants in the process, who themselves become the main characters of funny situations. Here is another example from the experience of Pepeliaev Group:

Or the bankruptcy case No. A19-3409/2014, well-known in legal circles. There, Viktor Petrov, a participant in the dispute, attracted attention. From the ruling of the Court of Justice of the Irkutsk Region dated September 29, 2015, the text of his complaint addressed to the chairman of the court Batraz Aldatov about speeding up the proceedings became known. Its content, apparently, so impressed judge Marina Chigrinskaya that Petrov was fined (2,500 rubles) for “undermining the authority of justice.” As its definition says, Petrov " allowed expressions and phrases that contradict not only the norms of Russian literary language, but also generally accepted standards of etiquette and morality".

It will be difficult to retell the complaint without losing its “artistic form,” so here are some quotes from it [author’s spelling preserved]:

On 06/17/2015, there was already a complaint about red tape addressed to the Chairman of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation V.M. Lebedev, where, in order to speed up the time for consideration of the application, they asked for “gesheft” for the chairman of the court Aldatov Batraz, who is silent on complaints in writing and according to statements is barely almost speeds up, “his hands are full.”
Thus, we understand little or little that from 06/15/2015 to 07/29/2015 Judge Marina Chigrynskaya was spinning the dynamo, and then on 07/30/2015 she was spinning the propeller, and we all flew away not for 10 days, but until 09/09/2015.
Moreover, according to the statement dated 06/25/2015, the chairman also barely accelerated, remained on the handbrake, and we are again stuck on the case until 09/09/2015.
Based on the above, 1. I ask the chairman of the court Aldatov Batraz (like in the movie the hero - Kamander V.I. Chapaev in a papakha and a burka back and forth on pineapples and bananas) to clearly depict to Judge Marina Chigrinskaya the deadline for adjournment legal proceedings on the basis of paragraph 5 of Article 158 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation<...>
<...>I ask the chairman of the court, Aldatov Batraz, taking into account the repeated applications for acceleration in case No. A19-3409/2014, to speed up a little or hurry up on the basis of part 6 of article 6.1. Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation alone or in duo with a judge.
<...>I ask Chairman Aldatov Batraz, in case of another refusal, to personally head the consideration of case No. A19-3409/2014, so that everyone can see this and everyone will envy us

In Alaska, it is completely illegal to hunt moose by shooting them from an airplane or any other aircraft.

It is curious that according to generally accepted legal practice wedding ring is not an asset included in the described property in bankruptcy. Thus, it cannot be claimed by creditors, no matter how large the size of the debt.

The American state of Kentucky requires its citizens to go to the bathroom at least once a year.

It was only in 1948 that Bermuda authorities allowed private motorized transport, which is the reason why there are so many bicycles there.

In Renaissance Florence, there was a law prohibiting women from wearing buttons on their clothes.

Idaho has a ridiculous law banning residents from giving each other boxes of candy weighing more than 50 pounds or 22.68 kg.

The most radical method of dealing with drunk drivers exists in San Salvador, where the death penalty is imposed for this violation.

In 1970, Russell H. Tansey, an Arizona attorney, filed a $100,000 damages lawsuit against God! The application was filed on behalf of his secretary Betty Penrose, where the accusation was made that God was unable to control the elements, which is why lightning struck Mr. Tansey's house. It is noteworthy that the case was automatically won due to the defendant’s failure to appear. True, history is silent about what happened next with the receipt of money.

Interestingly, impotence is an official reason for divorce in as many as twenty-four US states.

In Logan County, Colorado, the law says it is illegal to kiss a woman while she is sleeping.

Current New York City charter prohibits residents from selling cow or horse hides, burning offal or bones, or growing ragweed.

Until 1834, no soldier or unit of the American Army had the right to use state flag in battle. American artillerymen were the first to receive this privilege in 1834, then in 1876 the Marine Corps units received this honor, and a year later the cavalrymen received this honor. Before this, it was possible to go into battle only with regimental banners.

According to the US Navy Code, when selecting recruits, the commission must reject those who have obscene or indecent tattoos.

In 1978, New York City authorities passed a law requiring pet owners to clean up pet waste on the streets. The reason for this was the tens of millions of pounds of excrement that ended up on the city's streets every year.

The law in Arkansas states that during post-election vote counting, you are strictly prohibited from coming within 50 feet of a polling station's windows or doors, or the vote may be voided.

New York State prohibits hunting rabbits from the windows of a moving streetcar.

At one time, Virginia had a law against tickling women.

An unusual way to make a will was chosen by the Portuguese Luis Carlos de Noronha Cabral da Camara, who, 13 years before his death, with two witnesses, chose 70 random person from the Lisbon telephone book and identified them as heirs, although given the number of people recorded in the document, it is unlikely that any of them received anything significant from the eccentric aristocrat after his death.

As we see, in the world there are a huge number of sometimes completely ridiculous laws, because of which people often find themselves in difficult situations, and sometimes you can get away with it only with the help of an experienced lawyer who can legally prove the absurdity of the law and its inapplicability to today's realities.

And this applies to individuals, but what can we say about running a business, where it is correct to register for a company only one legal address Kyiv, Moscow, and even more so Berlin or New York, taking into account all the numerous norms of local legislation, can only be done by experienced lawyers. Another very difficult area for lawyers is land disputes, which are relevant literally at all times and for all countries, including Russia. It is very important to order the services of only experienced and respectable law firms, such as the Moscow office “Era Prava”, in the eraprava.ru/eath.html section of the official website of which there is all the necessary information about land disputes, and its employees have considerable knowledge of how to issue, and related areas of jurisprudence.

Two military friends, while on leave, were returning home from hunting in the evening through a small forest. In the forest, three men came out to meet them, two of them were drunk. Threatening the young people with knives, the robbers began to demand hunting weapons. One of the guys was not taken aback and opened fire, wounding one of the attackers. The bandits, not expecting such resistance, ran away. But one of the victims ran after them and killed the wounded man who lagged behind. What responsibility and who will bear in this situation?

The Voronkin family was accused in the criminal case: Proshka, 37 years old, his father, an old man, 78 years old, and Proshka’s wife Milanya, who was seven months pregnant at the time of the trial. To clarify the circumstances of the crime committed by this family, all members of this family were subjected to torture. The consequence of this was the death of Milania, who went into premature labor with a fatal outcome. What norms of the Summary of the Trials of 1715 were violated by the judge and what criminal liability will he incur?

The military court sentenced to death:

Private Spiridonov, who shot his colleague in service due to careless handling of weapons;

Private Arkhipkin, who shot a teenager who happened to be at the shooting range;

Private Vankin, who beat his comrade to death on a dare.

Based on the norms of criminal law according to the Military Article, decide whether these sentences are legal?

During the New Year celebration, a tipsy officer hit Private Sinichkin in the face with a backhand. He responded, as a result of which the officer was taken to the hospital. According to the officer, Private Sinichkin was similar to his worst enemy, who once caused him trouble, which led to his demotion. Later, at the trial, the officer motivated his behavior by the fact that he was drunk, and the private by the fact that he could not bear the insult. Who will suffer what criminal punishment in accordance with the norms of the Military Article?

Topic No. 7. Code of Criminal and Correctional Punishments of 1845. Seminar lesson plan

General characteristics of the Code of Criminal and Correctional Punishments of 1845

General concept of crime and misdemeanor.

Composition of the crime: subject of the crime, object of the crime, subjective side of the crime, objective side of the crime.

Crime system. Systematization criteria (church, state, personality, property).

System of punishments: criminal and correctional punishments, basic, additional and substitute punishments, social criterion. Compensation for damage caused by a crime. Circumstances excluding liability.

Sources

1. Russian legislation of the 10th and 20th centuries. M., 1988. T.6.

2. Chistyakov O.I. Domestic legislation of the 11th – 20th centuries. M., 1999. Part 1. XI-XIX centuries.

Literature

1. Vladimirsky-Budanov M.F. Review of the history of Russian law. Rostov n/d., 1995.

History of domestic state and law. M., 1996 and 1998. Part 1.

Development of Russian law in the first half of the 19th century. M., 1994.

See also interpretations, synonyms, meanings of the word and what CASE is in Russian in dictionaries, encyclopedias and reference books: