Abstract: This article examines the impact of the need for maintaining physical and social distancing between people caused by the epidemiological situation upon the organizational-legal means of the Russian judicial system. This implies the concept of “smart” regulation with the use of both traditional means of legal regulation (prohibitions, permits, obligations, sanctions, incentives) and tools of psychological, educational, and information influence. At the same time, distancing is viewed as a factor that prompts changes in the forms of legal activity, as well as the result of transformations taking place in society. Such organizational-legal means affected by the need for physical and social distancing, suggest using video conferencing systems, online sessions, change in the procedure for submitting procedural and other documents, familiarization with audio protocols of court hearing and other documents in digital format, as well as restrictions for presence in the courthouse. The author determines the advantages and disadvantages of the innovations. The conclusion is made that such restrictions must be temporary only to avoid violating the principles of transparency and openness of judicial proceedings.

Abstract: This article carries out a comparative-legal study of the institution of regulatory sandboxes in the Russian Federation and Georgia. Based on the information acquired upon the request of the National Bank of Georgia, the author examines the normative regulation of regulatory laboratories of Georgia – Decree of the President of the National Bank of Georgia No. 110/04 of May 25, 2020 “On the Approval of Establishment of Regulatory Laboratories by the National Bank of Georgia and their Use", as well as its comparison with the federal law and normative acts that regulate experimental legal regimes in Russia. The application of comparative-legal methods allows determining the similarities and differences in legal regulation and practice of implementation of such institutions in the Russian Federation and Georgia. Description is given to the terminological differences in legislation on legal experiments of the two countries, as well as the differences in the model of legal regulation of the institution of experimental legal regimes: comprehensive regulation by means of the federal law and normative acts in the Russian Federation, and overall regulation solely by the Decree of the President of the National Bank of Georgia. Georgia allows experimental regulation applicable exclusively to financial technologies, while the Russian Federation allows for a broader scope of implementation. This substantiates the differences in the requirements of initiators and authorities that regulate such legal experiments. The conclusion is made on the more successful practice of implementation of legal experiments in the sphere of financial technologies in Georgia, despite the absence of special law or large array of developing legislation.

Abstract: This article analyzes the Federal Law of July 31, 2020 “On Experimental Legal Regimes in the Sphere of Digital Innovations in the Russian Federation” enacted in 2021 and aimed at the creation of “regulatory sandboxes “ in the Russian Federation – special regimes that allow the organizations to test the effectiveness of innovative technologies in implementation of their products and services without the risk of breaching the legislation. Leaning on such theoretical categories  as “legal regime” and “legal experiment”, the author explores the elements of the new legal institution introduced into the Russian legal system. Description is given to the scope of applicability of the experimental legal regimes in Russia – the digital innovations. The article reviews the principles, objects, actors, conditions, restrictions, types, and stages of the experimental legal regime; as well as distinguishes the bodies that monitor and assess the legal experiments, including the authorized body for the experimental legal regimes, the organization that represents business community in the experimental legal regimes, regulatory body, coordinating body, the Central Bank of the Russian Federation. The grounds for termination of implementation of the experimental legal regimes are reviewed. Taking into account the foreign experience, the author predicts positive effect from the implementation of legislative novelty, which is able to ensure operational audit of fintech solutions and offset the potential risks of its implementation