«The Legal Nature» — a Legal Term or a Falsely Borrowed Word

The paper examines the perspectives of legal scholars regarding the significance and scope of the scientific application of the term «legal nature». This expression has been actively employed by prominent figures in Russian legal scholarship for over a century; however, a consensus regarding its definition remains elusive. The frequency and scope of its use by Russian academics have escalated to the point where some commentators have suggested that it lacks the requisite characteristics of a scientific term. Over the past decade, numerous specialized studies have revealed that «legal nature» is employed in jurisprudence with more than ten distinct meanings. The authors emphasize that the term «nature» lacks a uniform definition not only in jurisprudence but also in philosophy. Each scholar has endeavored to articulate a definition for the scientific concept encapsulated by this phrase. The authors of the study cogently criticize the validity of these attempts, highlighting the detrimental implications of the scientific use of «legal nature» and proposing strategies to mitigate the prevalent trend of employing polysemous terms broadly and this particular phrase specifically.

1. Alekseev S. S. Obshchie dozvoleniya i zaprety v sovetskom prave. — M.: Yuridicheskaya literatura, 1998. — 285 s.

2. Anisov A. M. Chto takoe nauka? // Vestnik RUDN. Seriya «Filosofiya». — 2011. — № 3. — S. 120–130.

3. Aslanyan N. P., Novikova T. V. Ob interpretatsii termina «pravovaya priroda» // Baikal research journal. — 2018. — T. 9. — № 4. — S. 17. — DOI: 10.17150/2411-6262.2018.9(4).17.

4. Aslanyan N. P., Novikova T. V. Prolegomeny k interpretatsii termina «pravovaya priroda» // Baikal research journal. — 2017. — T. 8. — № 4. — S. 28. — DOI: 10.17150/2411-6262.2017.8(4).28.

5. Vyazovskaya T. N. Grazhdansko-pravovaya priroda zalogovykh otnosheniy: avtoref. dis. … kand. yurid. nauk. — Krasnodar, 2004. — 24 s.

6. Grazhdanskoe pravo: uchebnik: v 3 t. T. 1 / pod red. A. P. Sergeeva. — 2-e izd., pererab. i dop. — M.: Prospekt, 2020. — 1040 s.

7. Danilenko V. P. Russkaya terminologiya. Opyt lingvisticheskogo opisaniya. — M.: Nauka, 1977. — 246 s.

8. Dubovichenko S. V., Karlov V. P. Pravovoy rezhim neprimeneniya smertnoy kazni v Rossii: pravovaya priroda i problemy obratnoy sily // Vestnik Volzhskogo universiteta imeni V.N. Tatishcheva. — 2022. — T. 2. — № 4 (103). — S. 93–99. — DOI: 10.51965/2076-7919_2022_2_4_93.

9. Zakharov V. A. Sozdanie yuridicheskikh lits: pravovye voprosy. — M.: Norma, 2002. — 202 s.

10. Komissarova E. G. Formalno logicheskie aspekty ponyatiya «pravovaya priroda» // Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. — 2012. — № 2 (16). — S. 23–29.

11. Malyugin S. V. Kategoriya «pravovaya priroda»: ponyatie, determinanty, osnovnye kharakteristiki i podkhody k opredeleniyu // Rossiyskiy yuridicheskiy zhurnal. — 2016. — № 3. — S. 46–58.

12. Matveev I. V. Pravovaya priroda nedeystvitelnykh sdelok. — M.: Yurlitinform, 2002. — 169 s.

13. Meyer D. I. Russkoe grazhdanskoe pravo: v 2 ch. Ch. 1. — M.: Statut, 1997. — 290 s.

14. Reformatskiy A. A. Vvedenie v yazykovedenie / pod red. V. A. Vinogradova. — M.: Aspekt-Press, 1996. — 536 s.

15. Sinayskiy V. I. Russkoe grazhdanskoe pravo. — M.: Statut, 2002. — 638 s.

16. Skvortsova T. A., Tserunyan G. V. K voprosu o pravovoy prirode dogovora postavki i o ego meste v sisteme grazhdansko-pravovykh dogovorov // Aktualnye nauchnye issledovaniya v sovremennom mire. — 2021. — № 2–9 (70). — S. 157–160.

17. Trubetskoy E. N. Entsiklopediya prava. — SPb.: Izd-vo Sankt-Peterburgskogo yuridicheskogo instituta, 1998. — 183 s.

18. Filipenko V. A. Pravovaya priroda s tochki zreniya filosofii // Voprosy rossiyskoy yustitsii. — 2022. — № 19. — S. 29–37.

19. Shershenevich G. F. Uchebnik russkogo grazhdanskogo prava. — M.: Spark, 1995. — 556 s.

20. Yuridicheskaya tekhnika: uchebnik / pod red. V. M. Baranova. — M.: Prospekt, 2021. — 648 s.