en Juridica ajakiri 2025/8-9 http://www.juridica.ee/ http://www.juridica.ee/article.php?uri=2025_8-9_valikud_igushariduses_v_rdlev_levaade&lang=en Legal education can serve three possible objectives: training legal scholars, training practising lawyers, and educating informed citizens. Some argue that these three objectives should be combined. Others contend that the aim must be clearly defined and not merged. The purpose of legal education determines the content of the law curriculum. Yet legal education involves additional points of choice. A longstanding dilemma concerns whether the goal is to convey specific knowledge or to teach skills. If the purpose is to convey knowledge, we must decide how much of it should be done. If the focus is on skills, we must determine which skills should be emphasised. Another distinct question concerns teaching methods. In Continental Europe, legal education was for a long time delivered primarily through lectures, and this remains the case in some countries. Another widely used teaching method is the case method. Alongside these, so-called clinical legal education is used, in which students earn academic credit for practical legal work carried out under professional supervision. Yet another method is to require students to learn primarily by reading textbooks. A further choice concerns how to assess the knowledge and skills acquired, as well as how to evaluate the overall quality of legal education. This article maps the various decision points in legal education, acknowledging that no perfect method exists that could be applied uniformly everywhere. Each model of legal education has its own advantages and disadvantages. 2025-11-25 12:20:35 András Jakab http://www.juridica.ee/article.php?uri=2025_8-9_likooli_autonoomiast_ja_halduslepingust&lang=en The latest report published at the end of 2023 by the European University Association (EUA) indicates that concerns are emerging in Estonia concerning university autonomy. In recent years, Estonia has experienced a decline in two specific areas: the indicator for organisational autonomy has fallen from 85% in the 2010–2018 comparison to 73%, and the financial autonomy indicator has dropped from 95% in 2010 to 77%. This decline has caused Estonia to fall from previously high positions in international rankings. The indicator for academic autonomy has also trended downward in recent years. The report reflects concerned voices noting that the Ministry has begun using contracts under public law in ways that undermine university autonomy and highlighting the risk that the ministry imposes its political agenda on universities. 2025-11-25 12:24:58 Madis Ernits, Raina Loom http://www.juridica.ee/article.php?uri=2025_8-9_sportlaste_igused_probleemid_seoses_eesti_spordikohtu_menetluse_kehtiva_korraga&lang=en On 11 October 2024, the General Assembly of the Estonian Olympic Committee (EOK) adopted the Estonian Sports Ethics Rules (ESER) to establish a framework that, in addition to the specific rules of individual sports, sets out ethical standards for sporting activities and a procedural system ensuring compliance with those standards. Under the ESER, one of the disciplinary bodies responsible for resolving sports-related disputes is the Estonian Sports Court. According to the EOK Statutes, the final decisions of the Estonian Sports Court must be recognised as binding, and members are prohibited from turning to national courts to contest the decisions of the Sports Court. The article highlights that the jurisdiction of the Estonian Sports Court extends compulsorily to an exceptionally wide range of persons, from athletes to spectators, and that arbitration agreements are generally concluded as standard terms, which may be void under the Law of Obligations Act. In the authors’ view, the mandatory procedure imposed on athletes before the Estonian Sports Court makes their path to legal protection more burdensome than proceedings in civil courts. Consequently, the authors argue that the current regulation does not provide athletes with a fair and affordable dispute-resolution mechanism compared to alternative civil proceedings and is incompatible with the constitutional principle of equal treatment. The regulation is also in direct conflict with European Union law. 2025-11-25 12:29:56 Sten-Marten Pukka, Rauno Kinkar http://www.juridica.ee/article.php?uri=2025_8-9_kaasomandi_esemele_tehtud_kulutuste_h_vitamine_korteriomaniku_n_uded_teiste_korteriomanike_&lang=en Under subsection 37 (1) of the Apartment Ownership and Apartment Associations Act, an apartment owner has the right to carry out actions necessary for preserving the object of common ownership without the consent of the other apartment owners or the apartment association, and may demand reimbursement of the necessary expenses from the apartment association. On 30 April 2025, in civil case 2-21-12405, the Supreme Court issued an order in which it changed its previous interpretation of subsection 37 (1) of the Apartment Ownership and Apartment Associations Act and subsection 72 (4) of the Law of Property Act, narrowing the concept of ‘necessary expenses’ within the meaning of these provisions. The Supreme Court further held that, in the obligational relationship between apartment owners arising from the performance of actions relating to the object of common ownership, and in any corresponding claim for reimbursement, no other legal provisions generally apply alongside subsection 37 (1) of the Apartment Ownership and Apartment Associations Act, including the rules on negotiorum gestio. This article analyses the claims an apartment owner may bring against other apartment owners and the apartment association for reimbursement of expenses incurred on the object of common ownership, taking into account both the Supreme Court’s order of 30 April 2025 and earlier case law that the Court has not overturned. 2025-11-25 12:34:39 Tambet Tampuu http://www.juridica.ee/article.php?uri=2025_8-9_kohtulahendi_igusj_u_piirangud_tarbija_krediidi_lepingute_n_itel_euroopa_liidu_iguse_m_ju_e&lang=en The principle of the res judicata effect of court judgments is an essential component of legal certainty. It requires that judicial decisions be reliable and remain in force. This means that once a legal dispute has been resolved by a judgment, it is generally not permissible to reopen the same dispute. Nevertheless, there are certain exceptions to the principle of res judicata. In civil proceedings, the Code of Civil Procedure allows, in specific circumstances, for the reopening of a final judgment through review proceedings when new material facts come to light. Situations in which the validity of a claim recognised by a final judgment must be reconsidered may also arise from European Union law. Mandatory principles aimed at protecting consumer rights stem from the Unfair Contract Terms Directive (hereinafter: the Standard Terms Directive) and the Consumer Credit Directive. National courts are under an obligation to apply EU law properly throughout the proceedings. This article examines the extent to which courts must, of their own motion, verify the validity of standard contract terms and the proper assessment of the consumer’s creditworthiness in payment order proceedings and in issuing default judgments; the key limitations applicable to the res judicata principle in disputes concerning consumer contracts; and whether the rules governing review proceedings, enforcement proceedings and bankruptcy proceedings in Estonia provide consumers, against whom a payment order or default judgment has become final, with a level of protection required under EU law against unfair standard terms and irresponsibly granted consumer credit. 2025-11-25 12:39:12 Piia Kalamees, Kalev Saare http://www.juridica.ee/article.php?uri=2025_8-9_tarbijakrediidi_aktuaalsed_probleemid_taotlemisest_tagasimaksmiseni_seminari_levaade&lang=en Questions related to consumer credit have been topical for many years. On the one hand, taking out loans is a routine aspect of modern society and economic functioning; on the other hand, excessive indebtedness may lead to over-indebtedness and result in serious personal and socio-economic consequences, which are further exacerbated by various crises (the COVID-19 pandemic, the energy crisis, the war in Ukraine). To analyse how consumers’ rights under consumer credit agreements are protected in conditions of financial stress, researchers from the University of Tartu, led by Professor Karin Sein, have launched a four-year project. As part of this project, the seminar ‘Current Issues in Consumer Credit: From Application to Repayment’ was held in Tallinn on 22 May 2025. This article provides a brief overview of the main arguments presented in the seminar’s talks. 2025-11-25 12:41:42 Age Värv, Karin Sein, Piia Kalamees http://www.juridica.ee/article.php?uri=2025_8-9_advokatuuriseaduse_ajakohastamine&lang=en The Bar Association Act has been in force since 2001, but its underlying principles date back even further – to a period in which the meaning of the legal profession, its societal role, and the legal services market were significantly different from today. Although lawyers frequently comment on the legality and justification of various legislative proposals and often suggest amendments to laws themselves, it is paradoxical that the Bar Association Act is one of the few laws in which the last substantial reforms were made nearly ten years ago. On the one hand, this is natural and understandable: the framework regulating the legal profession as a traditional branch of legal practice must indeed be stable. At the same time, lawyers, like all legal professionals, must keep pace with a changing world and ensure that the lawyer’s role in protecting both individual rights and the rule of law remains strong, and that the legal profession continues to be an attractive career choice for young people. For this reason, in 2022 the Board of the Estonian Bar Association initiated an analysis of the Act with the aim of identifying which parts of the Bar Association Act require amendment and modernisation. A package of proposed changes has now been developed, which the Bar Association intends to present after consulting its members. The planned amendments represent a systematic and principled reform, designed to align the Act with contemporary conditions in the legal services market, developments in professional ethics, and international practice. This article provides an overview of the planned changes, explaining both the background of the existing principles and the need for reform. 2025-11-25 12:53:43 Triin Toom http://www.juridica.ee/article.php?uri=2025_8-9_kiirustatud_seadusloome_hooletu_tagaj_rg&lang=en Starting from 6 July 2025, the General Part of the Penal Code (Penal Code subsection 1 (1) and clause 47 subsection 1) provides that when committing a misdemeanour stipulated in the Special Part of the Penal Code, a natural person may be punished by a fine of 1–300 fine units, i.e. EUR 8–2,400. For minors, the fine is generally half of that amount (see Penal Code subsection 47 (11). For a legal person, the fine ranges from EUR 100–400,000 (Penal Code subsection 47 (2)). However, if the elements of a misdemeanour are laid down outside the Penal Code, then, due to the new second sentence added to subsection 1 (1), the above-mentioned limits on fines no longer apply. By repealing subsection 47 (4) of the Penal Code and amending subsection 1 (1) solely to include the exception concerning misdemeanour elements established outside the Penal Code, the legislator forgot that within the Penal Code itself there are two misdemeanour provisions prescribing higher penalties than those allowed under subsections 47 (1) and (2) for natural and legal persons – namely subsections 398 (1) and (3) (insider dealing) and subsections 3981 (1) and (3) (market manipulation). In order to allow the imposition of fines up to the higher limits provided in §§ 398 and 398¹ (i.e. up to EUR 5 million for natural persons and up to EUR 15 million for legal persons) and to allow for the application of alternative methods of calculating the fine (based on the profit gained or damage avoided, or a percentage of the turnover of the legal person), the simplest solution would be to transfer subsections 398 (1) and (3) and subsections 398¹ (1) and (3) from the Penal Code to the Securities Market Act. Due to the retroactive effect of a more lenient law (subsection 5 (2) of the Penal Code), in all proceedings that have been initiated by 6 July 2025 or are initiated before the legislative situation is resolved, the limits set out in subsections 47 (1) and (2) must be applied (i.e. a maximum fine of EUR 2,400 for natural persons and EUR 400,000 for legal persons). 2025-11-25 12:55:57 Kersti Heide http://www.juridica.ee/article.php?uri=2025_8-9_probleemne_m_juv_imuga_kauplemise_kuriteokoosseis_riigikohtu_otsus_kriminaalasjas_1-22-3155&lang=en On 7 February 2025, the Supreme Court convicted a businessman and a senior official of a political party of influence peddling under § 2981 of the Penal Code and imposed suspended sentences on both individuals. The political party itself was punished with a pecuniary penalty. In the authors’ view, the Supreme Court’s interpretation of § 2981 of the Penal Code raises concerns in relation to the principle of legality set out in Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights. This, in turn, prompts an examination of the history of this criminal provision and the types of conduct punishable under it in other European countries. The article discusses France as an example because it is the birthplace of the offence of influence peddling. Germany is also examined, as German criminal law served as an important model in drafting the Penal Code. 2025-11-25 13:01:22 Stefan König, Marco Willumat