This article analyzes unregulated and hybrid transport service contracts that have emerged in modern mobility ecosystems. These include app-based taxi platforms such as Yandex Go and MyTaxi, ride-sourcing services, on-demand auxiliary services such as battery jump-start and alcohol-free driver assistance, and car-sharing models including Delimobil, Zipcar and Times Car Plus. These contractual arrangements combine elements of transportation, agency, rental, consumer services, digital intermediation and payment facilitation. As a result, they do not correspond to traditional classifications in civil legislation.

In many jurisdictions, including Uzbekistan, such contracts remain legally unnamed. This leads to difficulties in legal qualification, uncertainty in consumer protection, unclear distribution of liability, taxation problems and gaps in regulatory oversight. Based on civil-law theory, international transport regulation and comparative case studies, the article proposes a doctrinal understanding of hybrid transport contracts and develops recommendations to improve the legislative framework of Uzbekistan.

This article examines the relationship between the Constitution of Uzbekistan and Islamic law (Sharia), analyzing the extent of compatibility and potential conflict between the two systems of legal and moral authority. While the Constitution of Uzbekistan is a modern, secular document that reflects the nation's sovereignty and democratic aspirations, it also acknowledges the significant role of Islam in the cultural and historical life of the Uzbek people. This study explores the interplay between secular constitutionalism and Islamic law, with a focus on constitutional provisions related to human rights, the legal system, and religious freedoms. Through a comparative analysis, this article identifies areas where Islamic law may complement the Constitution and instances where tensions arise. The findings indicate that while Uzbekistan’s legal framework is largely secular, there are spaces where Islamic principles can influence societal norms, particularly in the domains of family law and personal conduct.

The incorporation of artificial intelligence (AI) into consumer markets initiates a genuine paradigmatic shift, revealing a tense dialectic between the empowerment of consumers and the emergence of unprecedented legal and ethical threats. The aim of the article is to provide a systematized analysis of this duality, covering both the positive effects of AI deployment (hyperpersonalization, preventive anti-fraud measures, online dispute resolution) and the risks inherent in the technology—algorithmic bias, manipulative practices, and the undermining of decisional autonomy. The methodological framework relies on a systematic review of scholarly and regulatory literature and a comparative legal analysis of key European Union instruments—the Artificial Intelligence Act (EU AI Act) and the new Product Liability Directive (PLD). The findings indicate that AI provides transformative tools for enhancing the efficiency and accessibility of consumer protection mechanisms; at the same time, the very same technological capabilities generate systemic risks of nonobjectivity and dilute the informed nature of decision making. The new European regulation establishes an advanced risk-based architecture, rethinking the allocation of responsibility and imposing preventive obligations on providers of AI systems, while simultaneously complicating enforcement. In conclusion, the paper substantiates the need for a balanced course that combines technological safeguards, proactive regulatory oversight, and the development of consumer digital literacy for the harmonious development of the digital economy. The presented conclusions are addressed to legal scholars, regulators, developers, and compliance professionals involved in AI governance.

The article examines the evolution and the growing inadequacy of the historical immunity of information intermediaries (marketplaces) in the face of widespread counterfeiting in electronic commerce. The legal definition of an “information intermediary” consistently lags behind commercial reality—a phenomenon aptly described as the regulatory lag hypothesis. This lag implies that existing legal frameworks fail to adequately address modern business models grounded in complex logistical partnerships. The relevance of the study is determined by the transformation of platforms from passive hosts into integrated logistical ecosystems (e.g., FBA), necessitating an urgent revision of outdated liability standards. The article aims to analyze case law from the United States, the European Union, and the Russian Federation, as well as the underlying economic conflict between the prohibition of general monitoring and the emerging obligation of proactive due diligence mandated by new legislation. Judicial practice demonstrates a transnational shift in focus from actual knowledge to operational control and “constructive knowledge.” The author’s key contribution lies in proposing a risk-tiered liability model that dynamically correlates joint liability with the degree of the platform’s involvement in logistics functions. The findings are intended for practicing lawyers, digital services regulators, and compliance professionals.