Up
The Supreme Court has reconsidered the position of the HCA concerning the social obligations of the State and the legal forfeit
21.07.2015
Dmitry Zabrodin, Associate of the Law Firm "YUST", shared with Pravo.ru his opinion concerning the decision of the Supreme Court of Russia on the case of the MUV “Passenger Transportation of the City of Penza”.
The venture transported the receivers of federal and regional benefits at its own cost, and then decided to recover its losses from Russia and from the Penza Region, respectively. The court of arbitration upheld the claim and also decided to recover the interest at the refinancing rate, should the respondents not perform the judgment timely. The respondents appealed against the penalty, referring to the special procedure of imposing exactions on the budget, but the instances of appeal and of cassation dismissed their arguments in 2014 alleging the position of the Higher Court of Arbitration. However, the Supreme Court decided to change said practice in 2015.
Dmitry Zabrodin, speaking about the possibility to recover losses of the regional transportation company from the Ministry of Finances of Russia, cited clause 2 of Article 26.3 of the Federal Law No. 184-FZ dated October 06 of 1999 concerning the operation of the authorities of the constituent territories. According to said clause, it is the constituent territories that must make the additional payments for transportation of benefit receivers. The courts of arbitration headed by the HCA, as a rule, had not mentioned this provision and exacted the losses from the State until 2015. Now the Supreme Court believes that only the constituent territory must bear the costs. Dmitry Zabrodin explains the absence of a single approach of the courts by the fragmentation of the benefit and budget payment laws and by absence of a direct and clear regulation.
Read more
Dmitry Zabrodin, Associate of the Law Firm "YUST", shared with Pravo.ru his opinion concerning the decision of the Supreme Court of Russia on the case of the MUV “Passenger Transportation of the City of Penza”.
The venture transported the receivers of federal and regional benefits at its own cost, and then decided to recover its losses from Russia and from the Penza Region, respectively. The court of arbitration upheld the claim and also decided to recover the interest at the refinancing rate, should the respondents not perform the judgment timely. The respondents appealed against the penalty, referring to the special procedure of imposing exactions on the budget, but the instances of appeal and of cassation dismissed their arguments in 2014 alleging the position of the Higher Court of Arbitration. However, the Supreme Court decided to change said practice in 2015.
Dmitry Zabrodin, speaking about the possibility to recover losses of the regional transportation company from the Ministry of Finances of Russia, cited clause 2 of Article 26.3 of the Federal Law No. 184-FZ dated October 06 of 1999 concerning the operation of the authorities of the constituent territories. According to said clause, it is the constituent territories that must make the additional payments for transportation of benefit receivers. The courts of arbitration headed by the HCA, as a rule, had not mentioned this provision and exacted the losses from the State until 2015. Now the Supreme Court believes that only the constituent territory must bear the costs. Dmitry Zabrodin explains the absence of a single approach of the courts by the fragmentation of the benefit and budget payment laws and by absence of a direct and clear regulation.
Read more
Rankings and Partners
