Methodological Aspects of the Dynamics of Legal Relationships as a Social and Legal Phenomenon

The article is devoted to the study of legal relationship as a phenomenon that exists in two modes of being of law: legal reality and legal validity. Classical approaches to the definition of a legal relationship as a social relationship regulated by law are criticized. The understanding of the legal relationship as a result of the implementation of legal norm is also criticized. It is recognized that these approaches do not fully provide a scientific characteristic of legal relationships as a social and legal phenomenon. Instead of the usually distinguished elements of a legal relationship in the form of a subject, object and content, it is proposed to study its dynamic parameters. The dynamics of a legal relationship is considered as a result of the intentionality of the legal consciousness of its subject. In legal reality, a legal relationship is studied as a social action in the conditions of adaptation of the subject to the environment. This legal relationship is due to the general normativity of biological, social and technical origin. The vital normativity of legal reality is considered as a determinant of legal relations. The locus of control in this legal relationship is focused on the subject exercising its rights and fulfilling its obligations. In legal validity, the legal relationship is due to the intentionality of the legal consciousness of the subject to implement legal norms through legal interaction with other participants in the legal relationship. The normativity of legal reality is based on legal regulation through legal acts (individual and general). In such a legal relationship, the subjects exercise their legal capabilities to the fulfillment of the legal duties assigned to other subjects. The locus of control is shifted to other participants in the legal relationship who exercise their rights and perform legal duties. In legal interaction, mutual recognition of the right is provided by the instance and/or the party of the legal relationship. In the legal validity, the physical, social and value, as well as vital normativity are supplemented by legal normativity. It is designed to neutralize social contradictions caused by the limitations of space, as well as the irreversibility of time. It is proved that the proposed concept of legal relations contributes to the solution of practical issues of the primacy of the legal norm or legal relationship, the revision of the criteria for differentiation of the legal system, the determination of the ratio of legal relations and offenses, the scientific consideration of some sectoral problems of the classification of legal relations. It is noted that the proposed concept of a legal relationship as a social action or legal interaction is quite conditional and applicable for cognitive purposes. In practice, quite often there is an intersection or mutual overlap of one type with another, a transition from legal reality to legal reality.

1. Grevtsov Yu. I. Legal Relationships and the Implementation of Law. Leningrad: Leningrad University Publ.; 1987. 128 p. (In Russ.).

2. Polyakov A. V Normativity of Legal Communication. Proceedings of Higher Educational Institutions. Pravovedenie. 2011;5:27-45. (In Russ.).

3. Permyakov Yu. E. Will the Demand for a Theory of Law Be Possible: Legal Judgments in the Context of Legal Communications. Law and State. 2015;3:75-80. (In Russ.).

4. Permyakov Yu. E. Reversible Perspective in the Philolosophical Cognition of the Law and Practical Jurisprudence. In: Philosophy of Law in Russia: Theoretical Principles and Moral Foundations. Saint Petersburg: Faculty of Philosophy and Political Science, St. Petersburg State University Publ.; 2007. P. 179-181. (In Russ.).

5. Jakubiec M. Legal Concepts as Mental Representations. International Journalfor the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Semiotique juridique. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-021-09853-7

6. Maksimov S. I. L. I. Petrazycki’s Idea of the Policy of the Law and Its Modern Meaning. In: Philosophy of Law in Russia: Theoretical Principles and Moral Foundations. Saint Petersburg: Faculty of Philosophy and Political Science, St. Petersburg State University Publ.; 2007. P. 69-72. (In Russ.).

7. Maksimov S. I. Legal Reality: an Experience of the Philosophical Comprehension. Kharkiv: Pravo Publ.; 2002. 327 p. (In Russ.).

8. Dyrda A., Gizbert-Studnicki T. The Limits of Theoretical Disagreements in Jurisprudence. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Semiotique juridique. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-020-09795-6

9. Schulz A. Selected Works: The World Enlightened by the Sense. Moscow: Russian Political Encyclopedia (ROSSPEN) Publ.; 2004. 1056 p. (In Russ.).

10. Tonnies F. Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft. Grundbegriffe der reinen Soziologie. Saint Petersburg: Vladimir Dal’ Publ.; 2002. 452 p. (In Russ.).

11. Myasnikov A. G., Myasnikova O. A. The Right for the Refusal of Communication (Kant and the Contemporary World). In: Philosophy of Law in Russia: Theoretical Principles and Moral Foundations. Saint Petersburg: Faculty of Philosophy and Political Science, St. Petersburg State University Publ; 2007. P. 77-79. (In Russ.).

12. Moor P. Le droit et ses limites: le juridique et le non-juridique. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Semiotique juridique. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-020-09776-9 (In French).

13. Porro C. Criminal Blame, Exclusion and Moral Dialogue. Criminal Law and Philosophy. 2021;15:223-235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11572-021-09563-y

14. Vissio G. Reasoning in Life: Values and Normativity in Georges Canguilhem. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Semiotique juridique. 2020;33:1019-1031. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-020-09786-7

15. Zalesskii V V Time Factor in the Civil Legal Relationships. Journal of Russian Law. 2006;9:114-121. (In Russ.).

16. Gmerek K. Procedural Acts as Double Conventionalized Acts: Considerations on Conventional Acts Performed in a Courtroom Discourse. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Semiotique juridique. 2021;34:473-495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-020-09681-1