Preview

Kutafin Law Review

Advanced search

Editorial Policies

Aim and Scope

The most important tasks of the journal are: generalization of theoretical and practical achievements in the field of jurisprudence, social and humanitarian sciences in their connection with actual problems of human life and society.

The scientific concept of the journal involves publication of research results that are important for the development of the world and domestic system of science and higher education.

Both domestic and foreign scholars working in the field of law, the humanities and other social sciences are invited to publish in the journal.

The journal covers general issues of the development of law in their connection with the current problems, as well as the role of law in the development of society, its institutions and mechanisms, the issues of contribution of legal thought to the improvement of social relations, the system of Russian law harmonization and respect for basic human rights.

The journal publishes original articles, the results of fundamental research aimed at studying theoretical issues of law and law enforcement practices, lectures and reviews of literature on a wide range of issues relating to the legal and social life of modern society.

The editorial office of the journal has highest regard for improving legal education and training of highly qualified personnel.

 

Section Policies

CURRENT GLOBAL ISSUES
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
MAN AND LAW
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
LAW AND SOCIETY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
LABORATORY OF LEGAL STUDIES
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
RIGHT TO HEALTH AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
PHILOSOPHY OF LAW
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
LEGAL PROFESSION ABROAD
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
INTERNATIONAL LAW OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
LAW EVOLUTION
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
LAW OF INTERNATIONAL TREATIES
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
PRESSING ISSUES OF MODERN LEGAL BRANCHES
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN BANKING LAW
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN SPORTS LAW
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
CRITICAL SCHOOL OF THOUGHT IN INTERNATIONAL LAW
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
A BOOK REVIEW
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
LAW AND ECONOMICS
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
REGIONAL INTEGRATION
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
GLOBAL DIMENSION OF LAW
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
EUROPEAN LAW CONTEXT
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
LAW WITHIN EURASIAN AREA
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
INTERNATIONAL LAW THEORY
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
NORTH PACIFIC REGIONAL LEGAL ISSUES
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS OF DISPUTE SETTLEMENTS
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
COMPARATIVE LAW CORNER
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
OTHER LEGAL ISSUES
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
OVERVIEWED
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
LEGAL EDUCATION - TRAINING FOR LAW MOOT COMPETITIONS
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
COPYRIGHT LAW
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
CRIMINAL LAW - JUVENILE OFFENDERS
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
LAW-MAKING
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
TAXATION LAW
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
INTERNATIONAL LAW
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
SPORTS LAW
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
JURISPRUDENCE
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
PHILOSOPHY AND THEORY OF LAW
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
MANAGEMENT, POLITICS AND LAW
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
AT THE FOREFRONT OF LEGAL RESEARCH
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
HUMAN BEING, SOCIETY, LAW
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
SCIENTIFIC LIFE
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
RESEARCH ARTICLES
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
ARTICLES
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
BOOK REVIEW
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Publication Frequency

Twice a year

 

Open Access Policy

Open. The journal is distributed through Unit Catalogue of “Pressa Rossii” or Internet catalogue of ”Kniga Servis” Agency. The index is 45081. You can subscribe to the journal starting from every month.

 

Archiving

  • Russian State Library (RSL)
  • National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)

 

Peer-Review

A bilateral anonymous ("blind") peer review method is mandatory for processing of all scientific manuscripts submitted to the editorial staff of «Kutafin Law Review». This implies that neither the reviewer is aware of the authorship of the manuscript, nor the author maintains any contact with the reviewer.

  1. Members of the editorial board and leading Russian and international experts in corresponding areas of life sciences, invited as independent readers, perform peer reviews. Editor-in-chief, deputy editor-in-chief. We aim to limit the review process to 30 days, though in some cases the schedule may be adjusted at the reviewer’s request.
  2. Reviewer has an option to abnegate the assessment should any conflict of interests arise that may affect perception or interpretation of the manuscript. Upon the scrutiny, the reviewer is expected to present the editorial board with one of the following recommendations:
    - to accept the paper in its present state;
    - to invite the author to revise their manuscript to address specific concerns before final decision is reached;
    - that final decision be reached following further reviewing by another specialist;
    - to reject the manuscript outright.
  3. If the reviewer has recommended any refinements, the editorial staff would suggest the author either to implement the corrections, or to dispute them reasonably. Authors are kindly required to limit their revision to 2 months and resubmit the adapted manuscript within this period for final evaluation.
  4. We politely request that the editor to be notified verbally or in writing should the author decide to refuse from publishing the manuscript. In case the author fails to do so within 3 months since receiving a copy of the initial review, the editorial board takes the manuscript off the register and notifies the author accordingly.
  5. If author and reviewers meet insoluble contradictions regarding revision of the manuscript, the editor-in-chief resolves the conflict by his own authority.
  6. The editorial board reaches final decision to reject a manuscript on the hearing according to reviewers’ recommendations, and duly notifies the authors of their decision via e-mail. The board does not accept previously rejected manuscripts for re-evaluation.
  7. Upon the decision to accept the manuscript for publishing, the editorial staff notifies the authors of the scheduled date of publication.
  8. Kindly note that positive review does not guarantee the acceptance, as final decision in all cases lies with the editorial board. By his authority, editor-in-chief rules final solution of every conflict.
  9. Original reviews of submitted manuscripts remain deposited for 5 years.

 

Indexation

Articles in "Kutafin Law Review" are indexed by several systems:

  • Russian Index for Science Citation (RISC) – a database, accumulating information on papers by Russian scientists, published in native and foreign titles. The RSCI project is under development since 2005 by “Electronic Scientific Library” foundation (elibrary.ru).
  • Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines. The Google Scholar index includes most peer-reviewed online journals of Europe and America's largest scholarly publishers, plus scholarly books and other non-peer reviewed journals.

 

Publishing Ethics

The Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement of the journal «Kutafin Law Review» are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct guidelines available at www.publicationethics.org,  and requirements for peer-reviewed journals, elaborated by the Elsevier Publishing House (in accordance with international ethical rules of scientific publications)

1. Introduction

1.1. The publication in a peer reviewed learned journal, serves many purposes outside of simple communication. It is a building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. For all these reasons and more it is important to lay down standards of expected ethical behaviour by all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society for society-owned or sponsored journal: «Kutafin Law Review»

1.2. Publisher has a supporting, investing and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process but is also ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practice is followed in its publications.

1.3. Publisher takes its duties of guardianship over the scholarly record extremely seriously. Our journal programs record «the minutes of science» and we recognize our responsibilities as the keeper of those «minutes» in all our policies not least the ethical guidelines that we have here adopted.

2. Duties of Editors

2.1. Publication decision – The Editor of a learned «Kutafin Law Review»  is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working on conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. The Editor may be guided by the policies of the «Kutafin Law Review» journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.

2.2. Fair play – An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

2.3. Confidentiality – The editor and any editorial staff of «Kutafin Law Review» must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

2.4. Disclosure and Conflicts of interest

2.4.1. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

2.4.2. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.

2.5. Vigilance over published record – An editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to promote the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant.

2.6.Involvement and cooperation in investigations – An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies.

3. Duties of Reviewers

3.1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions – Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Publisher shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

3.2. Promptness – Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor of «Kutafin Law Review» and excuse himself from the review process.

3.3. Confidentiality – Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.

3.4. Standard and objectivity – Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

3.5. Acknowledgement of Sources – Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

3.6. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

3.6.1. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

3.6.2. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

4. Duties of Authors

4.1. Reporting standards

4.1.1. Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

4.1.2. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial 'opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.

4.2. Data Access and Retention – Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

4.3. Originality and Plagiarism

4.3.1. The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

4.3.2. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

4.4. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

4.4.1. An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

4.4.2. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.

4.4.3. Publication of some kinds of articles (eg, clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication. Further detail on acceptable forms of secondary publication can be found at www.icmje.org.

4.5. Acknowledgement of Sources – Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

4.6. Authorship of the Paper

4.6.1. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

4.6.2. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

4.7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

4.7.1. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

4.7.2. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.

4.8. Fundamental errors in published works – When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor of «Kutafin Law Review»  journal and cooperate with Publisher to retract or correct the paper, If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper.

5. Duties of the Publisher (and if relevant, Society)

5.1. Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of «Kutafin Law Review» in performing their ethical duties under these ethics guidelines. The publisher should ensure that the potential for advertising or reprint revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

5.2. The publisher should support «Kutafin Law Review» journal editors in the review of complaints raised concerning ethical issues and help communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.

5.3. Publisher should develop codes of practice and inculcate industry standards for best practice on ethical matters, errors and retractions.

5.4. Publisher should provide specialized legal review and counsel if necessary.

 

Founder

  • Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education “Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL)”

 

Author fees

Publication in "Kutafin Law Review" is free of charge for all the authors.

The journal doesn't have any Article processing charges.

The journal doesn't have any Article submission charges.

 

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

 

Plagiarism detection

"Kutafin Law Review" use native russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.

 

Preprint and postprint Policy

Prior to acceptance and publication in "Kutafin Law Review", authors may make their submissions available as preprints on personal or public websites.

As part of submission process, authors are required to confirm that the submission has not been previously published, nor has been submitted. After a manuscript has been published in "Kutafin Law Review" we suggest that the link to the article on journal's website is used when the article is shared on personal or public websites.

Glossary (by SHERPA)

Preprint - In the context of Open Access, a preprint is a draft of an academic article or other publication before it has been submitted for peer-review or other quality assurance procedure as part of the publication process. Preprints cover initial and successive drafts of articles, working papers or draft conference papers.
 
Postprint - The final version of an academic article or other publication - after it has been peer-reviewed and revised into its final form by the author. As a general term this covers both the author's final version and the version as published, with formatting and copy-editing changes in place.