English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

According to the Authors opinion in this paper’s, sometimes undertaken practice of the judgments regarding the tax law relationship conducted by the Constitutional Tribunal to specify the public interest in opposition to the entity rights and by bringing the need to respect the State Treasury and to achieve the planned revenue for the budget, cannot be approved. State’s fi scal interest justifi ed by the CT case is contrary to the public interest: retroactivity, the legislation ambiguity and lack of the respect to the established right. At the same time, there is underlying the need to provide for the tax legislator certain freedom while creating tax policy. The Tribunal should strive to balance the protection of the individual and social interest as well as to protect the interests of the single participants in the economic life. The CT should continue issue interpretative judgments – it is a valuable tool in the efforts to ensure an appropriate level to protect the individual and public interest, but it should accuse the current practice of issuing application judgments.

The Possibilities and the Practice to Protect the Public and the State’s Fiscal Interest by the Constitutional Tribunal