Article is aimed to analyze theft, as it is foreseen in Article 178 (theft) of The Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania. The aimof this study is to reveal the advantages and disadvantages of criminalizing theft in Lithuanian criminal law and to submit proposals to the legislator regarding adding and amending features of the act. In order to achieve these goals, the following tasks are set: to provide a historical overview of the criminalization of theft, to perform a detailed analysis of the criminalization of theft in the criminal laws of Lithuania and other countries, to submit proposals to the legislator of the Republic of Lithuania regarding the establishment of a certain subjective features of theft, to find out whether it is necessary to expand the subject matter of the theftinLithuanian criminal law. While trying to evaluate the current legal regulation established in the CC of Lithuania, at the same time the authors examine the criminal laws of other countries (Germany, Poland, Hungary, France, etc.)In their article, the authors also examine the identification of objective and subjective features in criminalizing theft. The authors point out that, for example, criminalization of theft in criminal law, in some countries, including Lithuania, name propertyof another(Latvia, Estonia, Poland, Russia, Italy, Australia, England) as theft, others a objectof another(Germany, Hungary, France, Turkey), and still others (Canada and England) use a broader term to define the subject of theft -money, any other movable and immovable property, as well as the right of claim and other intangible property. Moreover, the authors point out that subjective features (motive and purpose) in criminalizing theft are not enshrined in Article 178 of the CC of Lithuania. Meanwhile, the criminal laws of some foreign countries also define theft as a sign of selfishness -seeking to obtain(material) benefits [...].

This article aims to answer the question of whether the disposal of a foetus of a human not reaching the 22nd week of pregnancy with medical waste does not violate the right to dignified burial. The paper seeks to clarify whether the conceived and unborn child can be the subject of human rights. By answering this question, one can look for a solution to the issue of the dignified burial of the foetus and the embryo of the perished human. Medical science has undeniably proved that human life appears from the moment of conception, however, the jurisprudential approach to the subjective nature of the unborn child is not unanimous, and the aspiration to establish the rights of the developing life in the pre-natal stage becomes a decisive challenge. The burning of non-surviving of human embryos and foetuses with medical waste reveals the attitude of the law towards unborn life. In order to achieve the goal, the case law of foreign countries and international treaties and conventions are examined. The research carried out shows that a decision regarding to the subjectivity of unborn life is inherent to the law of many foreign countries, Lithuania being not an exception. They Lithuanian law does not have an explicit and unambiguous definition of the legal status of the human’s embryo and foetus, and has no concerns on its legal protection and the rights. The Law on the Amendment of the Law on the Burial of Human Remains was considered and adopted in 2017. It equates non-surviving human foetuses and embryos to human remains and allows them to be buried or cremated with dignity. This change has altered the inhumane legal attitude to the unborn life that has been prevailing so far. However, Lithuania is one of the few countries comparing the remains of embryos and foetuses to human remains without establishing the boundary of pre-natal age.[...]

Gydytojo profesijos visuminis pobūdis gali būti apibūdintas visų pirma kaip misija ar pašaukimas pagelbėti pacientui sunkiomis jam egzistencinėmis aplinkybėmis. Dėl šios priežasties gydytojo veiklai keliami aukšti etiniai standartai, kuriuos laikui bėgant suformulavo pati medikų profesinė bendruomenė. Profesinių standartų vaidmuo pripažįstamas ir teisėje, todėl nenuostabu, kad teismai, vertindami gydytojų atsakomybę dėl netinkamai suteiktų sveikatos priežiūros paslaugų, atsižvelgia ir į profesinių standartų laikymąsi teikiant šias paslaugas. Straipsnis nagrinėja Lietuvos teismų praktikos požiūrį į gydytojų profesinės etikos reikšmę atsakomybės atvejais.