A PRAXEOLOGICAL VIEW OF THE LEGAL MECHANISM OF OF COMPENSATION FOR DAMAGED OR DESTROYED PROPERTY AS A RESULT OF OF THE ARMED AGGRESSION OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION: PART ONE

Abstract

Abstract. The purpose of the article is to analyze the legislative instruments on compensation for damaged or destroyed property as a result of the armed aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine (hereinafter – the compensation mechanism) and to apply it in the praxeological dimension. The compensation mechanism can be divided into two stages. The first stage involves the collection, preparation and submission of documents – evidence of damaged or destroyed property. The second stage outlines the procedure for calculating the amount of compensation, the priority, methods and sources of its receipt, etc. Therefore, the author has prepared a series of articles to study this issue. In the context of this article (part one), two approaches to defining the components of the legal regulation mechanism are formulated. One of them reflects legal influence on social relations, which consists in a set of legal means and legal methods. The second approach is aimed at implementing the provisions of law and provides for the introduction of all the necessary elements of the legal system of society through certain actions performed by a person in order to achieve the appropriate result. It is found that such a component of the legal regulation mechanism as the implementation of legal norms reflects the principles of praxeology. It is determined that what is common to praxeology and law implementation is the established norms, activities and rules of practice as ways to effectively achieve the planned goal. It is proved that the essence of the praxeological view of the compensation mechanism as a methodological tool is characterized by three features: a set of legal norms; a system of practical rational activity which is realized by a person and leads to an effective result; and intentionality. The article analyzes the first stage of the compensation mechanism, which concerns the preparation and submission of documents. The incompleteness of the national regulation of these relations is manifested in the absence of a coherent legal mechanism which would determine a consistent procedure for actions by compensation recipients. Instead, the legislator provides the subjects of law with a significant number of regulations governing these issues, as well as state and non-state bodies that have public competence and authority to maintain information about the subjects and their objects of damaged or destroyed property. From a praxeological point of view, the compensation mechanism does not sufficiently reflect the principle of legitimate expectations, significantly complicates the process of enforcement by compensation recipients and requires improvement.