Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Features of the Application of the Decisions of the European Court of Human Rights by Ukrainian Courts in Tax Cases Cover

Features of the Application of the Decisions of the European Court of Human Rights by Ukrainian Courts in Tax Cases

DANUBE
Volume 11 (2020): Issue 1 (March 2020)
By: Igor Babin  
Open Access
|Apr 2020

References

  1. Babin, I. I. (2016). The modern system of local taxes and fees of Ukraine. Societas et Iurusprudentia, IV (3), 21–40.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  2. Babin, I. I. (2018). Tax Law: Textbook. Kyiv: Kondor.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  3. Code of Administrative Justice of Ukraine. BVR. 2005, No. 35–36, No. 37, item 446, as subsequently amended.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  4. Constitution of Ukraine. BVR. 1996, No. 30, item 141, as subsequently amended.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  5. Criminal Code of Ukraine. BVR. 2001, No. 25–26, item 131, as subsequently amended.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  6. ECtHR. Bulves AD v. Bulgaria. App. No. 3991/03, January 22, 2009. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  7. ECtHR. Burden v. The United Kingdom. App. No. 13378/05, April 29, 2008. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  8. ECtHR. Feldman v. Ukraine. App. No. 76556/01 and 38779/04, April 08, 2010. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  9. ECtHR. Ferrazzini v. Italy. App. No. 44759/98, July 12, 2001. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  10. ECtHR. J. B. v. Switzerland. App. No. 31827/96, May 03, 2001. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  11. ECtHR. Janosevic v. Sweden. App. No. 34619/97, July 23, 2002. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  12. ECtHR. Jussila v. Finland. App. No. 73053/01, November 23, 2006. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  13. ECtHR. Kadri v. France. App. No. 41715/98, March 27, 2001. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  14. ECtHR. Kurt Nielsen v. Denmark. App. No. 33488/96, February 15, 2000. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  15. ECtHR. Matsyuk v. Ukraine. App. No. 1751/03, December 10, 2009. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  16. ECtHR. Merit v. Ukraine. App. No. 66561/01, March 30, 2004. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  17. ECtHR. Mooren v. Germany. App. No. 11364/03, Grand Chamber, July 09, 2009. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  18. ECtHR. Rakitin v. Ukraine. Appl. No. 7675/04, January 11, 2007. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  19. ECtHR. Serkov v. Ukraine. App. No. 39766/05, July 07, 2011. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  20. ECtHR. Shchokin v. Ukraine. App. No. 23759/03 and 37943/06, October 14, 2010. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  21. ECtHR. Smirnov v. Ukraine. App. No. 1409/03, July 30, 2009. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  22. ECtHR. Sokor v. Ukraine. App. No. 49009/07, December 09, 2010. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  23. ECtHR. Terem LTD, Chechetkin and Olius v. Ukraine. App. No. 70297/01, October 18, 2005. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  24. ECtHR. Västberga Taxi Aktiebolag and Vulic v. Sweden. App. No. 36985/97, July 23, 2002. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  25. ECtHR. Vergelskiy v. Ukraine. App. No. 19312/06, March 12, 2009. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  26. ECtHR. Von Sydow v. Sweden. App. No. 11464/85, October 08, 1987. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  27. European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. (1950), as amended by Additional Protocols. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  28. Law of Ukraine “On Enforcement of Decisions and Application of the Practice of the European Court of Human Rights”. BVR. 2006, No. 30, item 260.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  29. Law of Ukraine “On International Treaties”. BVR. 2004, No. 50, item 540, as subsequently amended.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  30. Law of Ukraine “On Ratification of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950, the First Protocol and Protocols No 2, 4, 7 and 11 to the Convention”. BVR. 1997, No. 40, item 263.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  31. Mahrelo, M. (2013). A non-binding precedent: some aspects of the substance of the European Court of Human Rights decisions in the legal system of continental law. Bulletin of the Academy of the Bar of Ukraine, 3, 61–67.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  32. Mazur, M. V., Tahiiev, S. R., Benitskyi, A. S., Kostrytskyi, V. V. (2006). Interpretation and application of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms by the European Court of Human Rights and the Courts of Ukraine. Luhansk: RVV LDUVS.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  33. Onopenko, V. V. (2011). The Mechanism for the Protection of Human Rights in Ukraine Needs Substantial Improvement (Presentation at the International Conference). Law of Ukraine, 7, 64–68.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  34. Resolution of Plenum of the Supreme Administrative Court of Ukraine “On decision in administrative case”. May 20, 2013, No. 7. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://zakon2.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/v0007760-13.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  35. Resolution of the Supreme Court of Ukraine “On invalidation and cancellation of tax notification-decision and tax claim”. January 18, 2018, No. K/9901/1648/17, No. 804/1241/17. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/71692-929.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  36. Resolution of the Supreme Court of Ukraine “On invalidation and cancellation of tax notification-decision”. January 31, 2011, No. 826/14268/14. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/14222189.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  37. Resolution of the Supreme Court of Ukraine “On invalidation and cancellation of tax notification-decision”. June 14, 2016, No. 21-42a10. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/58789047.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  38. Sadchikova, O. V. (2009). Decisions of the ECHR and their significance for the Russian law enforcement practice: abstract. diss. . . . cand. legal sciences. Moskow: Mosk. gos. in-t mezhdunar. otnoshenij.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  39. State Judicial Administration of Ukraine. (2016). Separate Opinion of Judge of the Trial Chamber in Administrative Matters of the Supreme Court of Ukraine Samsin I. L. regarding the resolution of the Supreme Court of Ukraine of June 14, 2016 in the case of the claim of LLC “Porcelain-Faience” to the STI in the Shevchenkivsky district of the State Tax Service of Ukraine in Kyiv on the recognition of illegal and annulment of tax notices-decisions of 14.06.2016, 21-42a10. Retrieved January 12, 2020, from http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/58874624#.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  40. Tax Code of Ukraine. BVR. 2011, No. 13–14, No. 15–16, No. 17, item 112, as subsequently amended.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  41. Timchenko, L. D. (2004). International Law: Textbook, stereotyped (3rd ed). Kharkiv: Konsul; Nacz. un-t vnutr. del.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  42. Vaško, A. (2019). Intelligence Information within Criminal Proceedings. DANUBE: Law, Economics and Social Issues Review, 10(3), 267–283.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  43. Yudkivska, A.Iu. (2011). Some Issues in the Application of the Practice of the European Court of Human Rights in Ukraine. Law of Ukraine, 7, 74–79.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/danb-2020-0005 | Journal eISSN: 1804-8285 | Journal ISSN: 1804-6746
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 75 - 89
Published on: Apr 21, 2020
Published by: European Association Comenius - EACO
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year
Keywords:
European Court of Human Rights,
Tax Law,
Case Law,
Ukraine
Related subjects:
Business and economics,
Political economics,
Macroeconomics,
Economic policy,
Law,
European law,
European law, other,
Law, other

© 2020 Igor Babin, published by European Association Comenius - EACO
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 11 (2020): Issue 1 (March 2020)