This paper is structured around three central questions: (1) Can animals be legal persons? (2) How is legal personhood related to the recognition of rights? (3) How do these two questions relate to effective animal protection? The paper first outlines the positions of the main proponents of well-known theories of rights – namely, the will-based and interest-based theories – to examine more closely whether legal personhood for animals can be justified. Turning to the second question, while the recognition of legal personhood is traditionally considered a prerequisite for the recognition of rights, this text questions that assumption at one point. Various models of animal protection are then presented, each addressing the purpose of granting rights to animals. Although the paper does not avoid the difficulties that hinder the recognition of legal personhood and substantive rights, it concludes that the effectiveness of animal protection is closely linked to the recognition of legal personhood.

Thanks to the unstoppable rise of social media and other online communication channels, acts of animal cruelty and deficiencies in animal husbandry culture are now receiving increasing publicity. The research found that the growing interest in animal welfare reflects a broader shift in social attitudes. Whether we examine the assessment of animal cruelty at the level of morality or law, we see a rapidly and continuously changing process that is internally coherent. The objective of this study is based on this finding. First, by highlighting the depth of the relationship between morality and law, it demonstrates that these two institutions are inseparable and mutually influential. The following part of the study describes the development and current system of moral and legal norms relating to animal cruelty, and finally, through de lege ferenda proposals, it aims to provoke thought and initiate debate regarding the further development of the system.

Pet ownership, particularly the keeping of exotic birds, is becoming increasingly popular. However, we still know surprisingly little about certain segments of animal keepers. This study aims to profile a distinct group within this community: collectors. Based on 20 interviews conducted using the snowball sampling method, the research highlights the characteristics of these individuals. The findings suggest that breeding may provide a sustainable alternative to meet the demand for live specimens of protected species and could also serve as a foundation for species reintroduction and repopulation programmes. However, due to the increasingly stringent legal framework, the boundaries between legal and illegal keeping practices are becoming more blurred.

The study examines the data-protection implications inherent in the domestic candidate nomination system. In Hungary, the nomination of a candidate for election is based on the legal mechanism of collecting voters’ ‘recommendations’, a process that necessarily involves the processing of their personal data. This gives rise to several data-protection dilemmas, the most significant of which are: (a) whether a voter’s recommendation constitutes or reveals a ‘political opinion’; (b) the role, under data protection law, of those collecting recommendations; (c) the lawful duration of the collection process; and (d) whether voters may be informed or ascertain that their personal data appear on a recommendation sheet. The analysis is grounded in a dogmatic legal method: it reviews and evaluates both domestic and European legal sources, the official positions adopted by supervisory authorities, and the pertinent academic literature. The study demonstrates that the development of the regulatory framework reflects the gradual incorporation of data-protection safeguards; nevertheless, in several areas it continues to employ regulatory solutions that depart from, and in certain respects even contradict, the underlying logic of data-protection law.

The rise of digitalisation, network externalities, and data as novel sources of competitive advantage has fundamentally challenged traditional doctrines of competition law. With the adoption of the Digital Markets Act (DMA) and the Digital Services Act (DSA), the European Union has established an ex ante, preventive regulatory paradigm designed, among other aims, to avert market distortions caused by gatekeeper platforms. By contrast, the United States continues to rely primarily on ex post enforcement, precedent-based adjudication, and judicial processes in governing digital service markets. The divergence between these two models reflects deeper economic-philosophical and legal-policy differences; however, an emerging tendency towards convergence can be observed in their shared recognition of the democratic and geopolitical significance of digital markets. The evolution of competition law in recent decades has been profoundly shaped by digital corporations, which have redefined the conceptual boundaries of global market structures. A comprehensive understanding of contemporary legal practice and regulatory developments therefore requires a systematic examination of the theoretical divergences and convergences, and of the underlying explanatory factors shaping both regimes.

In this study, we analyse in detail Decision 20/2014 of the Slovak Constitutional Court, which examined the constitutionality of certain provisions of the Act on Land Acquisition. In this decision, the Constitutional Court addressed the constitutionality of the rules governing the transfer of ownership of agricultural land by sale. In addition to analysing the Constitutional Court's decision, the study discusses the background to the initiation of the Constitutional Court proceedings, the aftermath of the Court's decision, and the 2017 amendment to the Slovak Constitution, which is closely related to the topic under review.

In Honduras, the corrupt elite that came to power after the 2009 military coup allowed foreign investors to create special economic zones in the country as part of a new economic stimulus package. These zones were allowed to create their own private legal framework, which Tegucigalpa hoped would improve the country’s economic situation. The most famous ZEDE implemented has been Próspera, which is mainly backed by US venture capital managers. After the Honduran legal framework on ZEDEs was repealed in 2024, a certain amount of uncertainty arose, as although investments are protected for 10, or 50 years, the hostile social and political environment might pose a significant obstacle to their continued operation.