Erratum: Optical activity of noncentrosymmetric metals [Phys. Rev.B 81, 094525 (2010)], Magnetostatic and optics of noncentrosymmetric metals [Phys.Rev.B 88, 134514 (2013)] V.P.Mineev Commissariat a l’Energie Atomique, INAC / SPSMS, 38054 Grenoble, France (Dated: November 8, 2018) PACS numbers: 78.20.Ek,74.20.Fg,74.25.N-,74.72.-h The boundary condition for the combinations E ± = E$_{x}$ ± iE$_{y}$ of the electric field component given by Eq. (75) in the paper 1 should be Sign in the bracket in this equation is ∓ unlike to the sign ± in the paper $^{1}$. The wrong sign has originated from an arithmetic error in the transition from Eq. (74) to Eq. (75) in $^{1}$. Here, E$_{1}$ and E$_{2}$ correspondingly are the complex amplitudes of electric component of em wave normally incident and reflected from the surface of noncentrosymmetric media, E$_{0}$ is the amplitude of transmitted wave. N ± = N ± 2 πiλ c is refractive index of gyrotropic media. The second boundary condition is given by Eq. (69) The solution of these two equations yields the reflection coefficients for the clockwise and counter clockwise circular light polarization Thus, unlike to the statement formulated in 1 R + is proved to be equal to R $^{−}$. Hence, the Kerr effect for the rotation of polarization of light reflected from the naturally gyrotropic media found in papers 1,2 is in fact absent. In microscopic calculations of Kerr rotation undertaken in the papers 3–5 were used the phenomenological expression for the Kerr angle obtained by A.R.Bungay, Yu.P.Swirko, and N.I. Zheludev $^{6}$. These authors have derived boundary conditions for electric field making use the textbook procedure and the expression for the gyrotropy current given by Eq. (30) in paper 6 which in our notations looks as follows In fact the correct gyrotropy current expression can be obtained from the gyrotropy term in action By variation of action in respect of − A /c and making use the definitions E = − (1 /c ) ∂ A /∂t and B = rot A , we come to Here , unlike to 1 we have taken into account coordinate dependence of λ term corresponding to half a space ( z > 0) filled by gyrotropic media. The standard derivation making use the Maxwell equations and the gyrotropy current (6) leads to the boundary conditions (1) and, hence, to the Kerr effect absence. It is worth to be noted that formula (1) in the paper 1 has been derived by different way not using the formula (6) for gyrotropy current but the expression for the gyrotropy magnetic moment M$_{g}$ = 1 2 c λ E (7) λ ( z ) = λθ ( z ) j$_{g}$ = rot λ E − 1 2 ∇ λ × E . (6) − 1 2 c ∫ dtd $^{3}$r ( λ E ) B . (5) j$_{g}$ = rot λ E . (4) R ± = E ± 2 E ± 1 = 1 − N 1 + N . (3) E ± 0 = E ± 1 + E ± 2 . (2) ( N ± ∓ 2 πi Λ c ) E ± 0 − E ± 1 + E ± 2 = 0 . (1) arXiv:1001.2113v2 [cond-mat.supr-con] 26 Mar 2014