home Designer Disputes related to the liability of the employer. The procedure for resolving collective labor disputes

Disputes related to the liability of the employer. The procedure for resolving collective labor disputes

For most labor disputes pre-judicial procedure for permission is provided. In contrast, cases of material liability of employees are considered directly in court. Clause 1 of the Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of November 16, 2006 No. 52 “On the application by the courts of legislation governing the liability of employees for damage caused to the employer” (hereinafter referred to as the Decree) clarifies the legal position, according to which, regardless of the value of the claim of the case on disputes about the material liability of an employee for damage caused to the employer are within the jurisdiction of justices of the peace. This rule It also applies when the damage was caused by the employee during the period of the employment contract, and the employer filed a claim after its termination. Consider the main requirements and provisions that should be taken into account when considering this category of cases in court.

When filing a claim, employers often refer to the fact that claims arising from labor relations are not subject to payment of state duty. Meanwhile, in accordance with Art. 333.36 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation the employer is exempted from paying state duty only when he goes to court with a claim for compensation for material damage caused by the employee's crime.

In other cases, the employer is obliged to pay the state duty, depending on the value of the claim, since, by virtue of sub. 1 p. 1 art. 333.36 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation and art. 393 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, when applying to the court with a claim arising from labor relations, employees, and not the employer, are exempted from paying duties and court costs.

Deadlines for going to court

The employer has the right to apply to the court for compensation for material damage caused by the employee within one year from the day the damage was discovered (Article 392 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

When checking the observance of the deadlines stipulated by law for applying to the court, it should be taken into account that the start of the indicated deadlines is the day following the day when it became known about the occurrence of damage. If these deadlines are missed and the defendant initiates a dispute on the application of the limitation period, the employer has the right to file a petition for their restoration. In case of missing the specified deadlines for a good reason, the justice of the peace restores them. Missing the deadline for applying to the court can be recognized as valid, for example, when it is caused by the need to conduct inspections, audits, investigations, etc., on the fact of causing damage, which took a long time. Missing the statute of limitations is not grounds for refusing to accept a claim.

The amount of damage

In accordance with Art. 238 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, the employee is obliged to compensate the employer for the direct actual damage caused to him (clause 2 of article 238 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

Previously, employees were obligated to compensate for damages incurred by the employer as a result of compensation for damages to other persons. This provision has now ceased to be valid.

Direct actual damage is understood as a real decrease in the employer’s cash property or deterioration of the said property, including the property of third parties held by the employer, if the employer is responsible for the safety of this property, as well as the employer’s need to incur costs (or excessive payments) for the acquisition, restoration of property or compensation for damage caused by the employee to third parties.

The Labor Code of the Russian Federation grants the employer the right, taking into account the specific circumstances of causing damage, to refuse to recover it from the employee in whole or in part (Article 240 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). Article 240 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation contains a provision that the owner of the property of the organization may restrict the specified right of the employer in cases provided for federal laws, other regulatory legal acts Russian Federation, laws and other regulatory legal acts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, regulatory legal acts of the bodies local government, founding documents organizations.

Article 241 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation establishes the limits of liability. For the damage caused general rule the employee is liable within the limits of his average monthly earnings.

Article 243 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation establishes cases of full liability, which consists in the obligation of the employee to compensate for the damage caused in full.

The procedure for determining the amount of damage is established by Art. 246 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, according to which the amount of damage caused to the employer in the event of loss and damage to property is determined by actual losses calculated on the basis of market prices in force in the area on the day the damage was caused, but not less than the cost property according to accounting data, taking into account the degree of depreciation of this property. Federal law may establish special order determination of the amount of damages subject to compensation caused to the employer by theft, deliberate damage, shortage or loss certain types property and other valuables, as well as in cases where the actual amount of damage caused exceeds its nominal amount.

The amount of damage is determined on the basis of market prices, the concept of which is given in Art. 3 Federal Law No. 135-FZ dated July 29, 1998 "On valuation activities in the Russian Federation" .

burden of proof

It is very important for the court to properly distribute the burden of proving the circumstances essential to the case. These, in particular, include: the absence of circumstances excluding the liability of the employee; unlawfulness of the behavior (action or inaction) of the tortfeasor; fault of the employee (of any form) in causing damage; causal relationship between the employee's behavior and the resulting damage; the presence of direct actual damage; the amount of damage caused; compliance with the rules for establishing individual, collective (team) responsibility.

If damage is discovered, the employer is recommended to conduct an internal audit.

To conduct an audit, the employer may create a commission with the participation of accounting workers (st. storekeepers, foremen, etc.). In accordance with Regulations on accounting dated 29.07.98 No. 34n, when facts of theft, abuse or damage to property are revealed, it must be an inventory has been made.

The procedure for conducting an inventory is established Guidelines oninventory of property and financial obligations, approved by the Order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated June 13, 1995 No. 49. Inventory is carried out, as a rule, audit commission, which includes representatives of the administration, accounting, other specialists (engineers, economists, technicians, etc.). After it has been carried out, it is necessary to draw up a collation statement (its form was approved by the Decree of the State Statistics Committee of Russia dated 18.08.98 No. 88). The collation statement is drawn up in two copies: one remains in the accounting department, the second is transferred to the employee responsible for the safety of valuables. It reflects the results of the inventory, i.e. discrepancies between accounting data and inventory records. Inventory materials are attached to the documents of the official investigation.

Requesting a written explanation from the employee to establish the causedamage is mandatory. In case of refusal or evasion of the employee from providing the specified explanation, an appropriate act is drawn up (Article 247 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

The employee and (or) his representative have the right to get acquainted with all the materials of the audit and appeal them in the prescribed manner (Articles 386, 391 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). All of the circumstances listed above must be proven by the employer in court. If he proved in court the legitimacy of concluding an agreement with the employee on full liability and the fact that this employee has a shortage, the burden of proving the absence of his guilt in causing damage is borne by the defendant.

Clause 5 of the Decree contains circumstances that exclude the possibility of bringing an employee to liability (Article 239 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). For example, actions of an employee that correspond to modern knowledge and experience, when the set goal could not be achieved otherwise, while the employee duly fulfilled the tasks assigned to him, can be attributed to normal economic risk. official duties, showed a certain degree of care and discretion, took measures to prevent damage. It is essential that the object of risk in this case was material values, and not the life and health of people.

Failure by the employer to fulfill the obligation to ensure proper conditions for the storage of property entrusted to the employee may serve as a basis for refusing to satisfy the requirements of the employer if this caused damage.

Manager's responsibility

In accordance with paragraph 2 of Art. 278 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, an employment contract with the head of an organization may be terminated at any time by the owner of the property or an authorized body of the organization. Managers seek the inclusion in the contract of conditions that allow them to protect themselves from the arbitrariness of the employer. Some judges have encountered the fact that employment contracts with heads of organizations include conditions that are clearly contrary to the law.

Full financial responsibility can be established by an employment contract concluded with deputy heads, the chief accountant. In the previous version of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, it was allowed to conclude an agreement on full liability with the head of the organization. However, as a result of the changes made to the Labor Code of the Russian Federation by Federal Law No. 90-FZ, Art. 243 of the Code there is no mention of the head of the organization as a subject of full liability. At the same time, there is Art. 277 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, according to which the head of the organization bears full liability for direct actual damage caused to the organization, regardless of whether an agreement on liability was concluded.

Paragraph 9 of the Resolution clarifies that the full liability of the head of the organization for damage caused to the organization comes by force of law (for example, on the basis of Article 277 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation or paragraph 2 of Article 71 of the Federal Law of December 26, 1995 No. 208-FZ “On joint-stock companies", or paragraph 2 of Art. 44 of the Federal Law of February 8, 1998 No. 14-FZ “On companies with limited liability"). A manager who is guilty of causing damage to an organization cannot be released from compensation for material damage only on the grounds that the limits of his liability are limited by an employment contract.

Crimes and misdemeanors

When considering cases of full compensation for harm by employees who have committed crimes or administrative offenses, difficulties arise. This is due to the fact that in order to be held liable on this basis, a court verdict in a criminal case or a decision of the relevant state body in a case of an administrative offense is required.

In paragraph 11 of the Resolution, it is explained that the only basis for bringing an employee to full liability under paragraph 5 of part 1 of Art. 243 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation is the infliction of damage as a result of criminal acts, confirmed by a sentence that has entered into legal force (including when the employee was fully or partially released from punishment, since the criminal nature of his actions was confirmed in the manner prescribed by law).

It is more difficult to resolve the issue of liability in the case when the employee was released from administrative responsibility for committing an offense due to its insignificance. There is an opinion that with the insignificance of an administrative offense there is no corpus delicti.

On the other hand, in paragraph 6 of Part 1 of Art. 243 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation does not refer to punishment for an administrative offense, but to the establishment by an authorized state body of the fact of an administrative offense. Clause 12 of the Resolution clarifies that in this case the employee may also be held liable in full.

Full liability agreement

When considering cases on the recovery of direct actual damage from an employee in the presence of an agreement on full individual or collective (team) liability, it is necessary to check the presence of the following conditions simultaneously:

1) the work or position of the employee with whom the contract is concluded must be indicated in the relevant list;

2) the employee has reached the age of 18;

3) the employee directly serves or uses the money, commodity values or other property (Article 244 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

Decree of the Ministry of Labor of Russia dated December 31, 2002 No. 85 approved a new The list of positions and works in the performance of which full liability is introduced, as well as standard forms of agreements on full individual or collective (team) liability were approved. Standard forms are advisory and can be changed or supplemented by provisions that do not contradict the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, in relation to specific conditions and characteristics of the enterprise.

Compared to the previous one, the new list of persons with whom it is possible to conclude agreements on full liability has become wider. It additionally includes:

1) specialists involved in servicing ATMs;

2) specialists who issue, store and destroy bank, credit and discount cards;

3) heads of construction and installation shops and foremen engaged in construction and installation works;

4) laboratory assistants, methodologists of departments (deans), heads of library sectors, etc.

When concluding an agreement on liability, it is not the title of the position that matters, but the work actually performed by the employee. When deciding on the choice of the form of liability (individual or collective), the employer must take into account that full individual liability can be established if the following mandatory conditions are met:

1) material assets are transferred under the report to a specific employee, and it is he who is obliged to fully ensure their safety;

2) for the storage (processing, vacation, sale, etc.) of valuables, the employee, as a rule, is provided with a separate isolated room or place for storing valuables;

3) the employee independently reports to the accounting department of the organization for the values accepted by him under the report.

All of the above follows from the content of the Standard form of an agreement on full individual liability. However, these requirements are not always met in practice, which in essence leads to the invalidity of liability agreements concluded with employees.

The imposition of liability is possible in respect of not all employees serving inventory and monetary values, but only in relation to those who hold positions or perform work related to the storage, processing, release (sale), transportation or use of these values in the production process . In practice, there are cases (especially in commercial organizations), when individual financial responsibility is assigned to employees holding positions or performing work not specified in the List. For example, car drivers, engineers, mechanics, etc.

The invalidity of such contracts is obvious. However, in all cases, any condition of the employment contract that worsens the position of the employee in comparison with labor legislation is recognized as invalid.

brigade responsibility

Questions also arise when considering cases of collective (brigade) liability, the legitimacy of which is often in doubt. It is not uncommon for an employer to bring claims against not all members of the team (team) who worked during the period of damage.

In such a situation, the court is faced with the need to resolve the issue of involving all interested parties in the case and determine their procedural status. In paragraph 14 of the Resolution, it is explained that in accordance with Art. 43 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the court has the right, on its own initiative, to involve in the case on the side of the defendant as third parties against whom claims are not brought, persons who do not declare independent claims regarding the subject of the dispute, since the correct determination of the individual responsibility of each member of the team depends on this ( brigades).

Since the persons with whom an agreement on collective (team) liability has been concluded bear it in a shared, and not in a subsidiary manner, when determining the amount of damage to be compensated by each of the defendants, the court must take into account the degree of guilt of each member of the collective (team), the amount monthly tariff rate ( official salary) of each person, the time that he actually worked as part of a team (team) for the period from the last inventory to the day the damage was discovered.

Clause 16 of the Decree contains an important clarification based on the shared nature of collective material liability: reducing the amount of damage in case of collective (team) liability is permissible, but only after determining the amounts to be recovered from each member of the collective (team), since the degree of guilt, specific circumstances for each member of the team (team) may be different (for example, the effective or indifferent attitude of the employee to the prevention or reduction of damage, etc.). At the same time, a reduction in the size of the penalty from one or more members of the team (team) cannot serve as a basis for a corresponding increase in the size of the penalty from other members of the team (team).

The concept of liability of employees

Liability of employees- this is the legal obligation of employees to compensate in full or in part the direct actual damage caused by their illegal and guilty actions to the employer for whom they work. Liability is applied regardless of bringing the employee to disciplinary, administrative or criminal liability. Liability should be distinguished from such measures of material influence as the deprivation or reduction of bonuses, remuneration based on the results of work for the year, etc.

Types of liability (full and limited)

Article 402 of the Labor Code establishes that employees, as a rule, bear full liability for damage caused through their fault to the employer. Legislation, collective agreements, agreements may establish limited material liability of employees for damage caused to the employer through their fault, with the exception of cases provided for in Article 404 of the Labor Code.

Limited liability means that the employee is obliged to compensate for the damage in the amount of his actual damage, but the amount of compensation cannot exceed the average monthly earnings.

Full liability- this is liability in the amount of the damage caused without limiting it to any limit. Full material liability occurs if no exceptions are made to the general rule on full material liability. In addition, full liability in cases provided for in Article 404 of the Labor Code.

Most often, full liability occurs when a written agreement on full liability is concluded between the employee and the employer.

Labor disputes are divided into individual and collective.

Individual labor dispute- this is a dispute (disagreement) between an employee and an employer on the application of legislative and other regulations, a collective agreement and other labor agreements.

Subject acts personally defined worker. They are usually considered in commissions on labor disputes (CTS), courts of general jurisdiction.

Collective labor dispute (conflict) - these are unresolved disagreements between the parties to collective labor relations regarding the establishment, change in the socio-economic conditions of work and life of workers, the conclusion, change, execution or termination of collective agreements, agreements.

Causes - guilty actions of officials, group egoism of workers who do not take into account the public interests.

The subject is employees (labor collective) represented by representative bodies. Allowed by conciliation commissions, labor arbitrations, Republican labor arbitration.

49. Criminal law. Subjects. Objects. Principles of criminal law. Criminal liability.

The concept of criminal law as a branch of law. The basis of the UE, as well as all branches of law, is the Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1993, in which the problems of protecting the rights and freedoms of man and citizen, the interests of society and the state occupy a central place and are directly related to issues of criminal liability. Criminal law is a branch of Russian law, which is a set of legal norms established by the highest bodies of state power that determine the criminality and punishability of acts, the grounds for criminal liability, the purpose of punishment and the system of punishments, the general principles and conditions for their appointment, as well as exemption from criminal liability and punishment.

Principles of criminal law.

a) The principle of legality (art. 3): In accordance with the principle of legality, only the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation can establish liability for specific actions or omissions. An exception to this rule is the regulation by the legislation of the Russian Federation of wartime of criminal liability for crimes against military service committed in wartime or in a combat situation, provided for by the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation itself. The principle of legality means that a person who has committed a crime must suffer a strictly defined punishment: in the form, within the limits and in the amount provided for by the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The principle of legality is concretized through the prohibition of the application of criminal law by analogy.

b) The principle of equality of citizens before the law (Article 4): Consolidation of this principle means a single basis of criminal liability for all persons, an equal right to the necessary defense, independence from the demographic or social characteristics of the individual, the grounds for exemption from criminal liability and punishment, the conditions for extinguishing a criminal record.

c) The principle of guilt (Article 5) means the subjective imputation and personal nature of criminal liability. Subjective imputation excludes liability without fault: if there is no intent or negligence, the act cannot be qualified as a crime. The personal nature of responsibility is manifested in the fact that each person is criminally liable only for the acts that he himself committed: responsibility cannot be shifted to other persons.

d) The principle of justice (art. 6): The punishment imposed by the court on a person for committing a crime must be fair, i.e. correspond to the nature and degree of social danger of the crime: sanctions for crimes characterized by significant social danger must be more severe than sanctions for less dangerous crimes. This principle reproduces within the framework of the criminal law the constitutional provision: "No one can be repeatedly convicted for the same crime." This side of the principle of justice enriches the principles of legality and humanism.

e) The principle of humanism (art. 7) is manifested primarily in the fact that the object of criminal law protection is human values (such as life, health, rights, legitimate interests and freedoms of a person). UE is also protected. security of the individual and society as a whole. The second side of the principle of humanism is addressed to ensuring the rights of a person who has committed a crime: punishment and other measures of a criminal law nature applied to a person cannot be aimed at causing physical suffering or humiliation of human dignity. In accordance with the principle of humanism, a more severe type of punishment from among those provided for the commission of a crime is assigned only if a less severe type of punishment cannot ensure the achievement of the goals of punishment.

The object of the crime is what the crime encroaches on. Any crime encroaches on social relations, not on things. The object of a crime can only be that social relationship that is protected by the current law (Article 2: public interests, the benefits of man and citizen, the normal functioning of public and state institutions, the safe existence of people; the peace and security of mankind.

The concept of the subjective side of the crime. The subjective side of a crime is the mental activity of a person directly related to the commission of a crime. It forms the psychological, i.e. subjective, the content of the crime, therefore, is its internal (in relation to the objective) side. The subject of a crime is a person who has committed a crime and is capable of incurring criminal liability for it in accordance with the law.

Criminal liability- it is based on the legal obligation established by the criminal, criminal procedural and penal law, the real suffering by the person who committed the crime, state censure, restrictions and deprivation of his rights and freedoms. It begins from the moment the competent state body issues a procedural decision, the implementation of which restricts the rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen. The decision of the guilty verdict and its entry into legal force ends the ongoing process (act) of bringing a person to criminal responsibility. The pronouncement of a guilty verdict ends with its public proclamation, in which, on behalf of the state, it is announced that the person is guilty of a crime and, as a rule, that he is sentenced.

Criminal liability is the most acute form of state coercion of people to the observance of the law. Therefore, it is assigned to the person who committed the crime in accordance with the special criminal procedural procedure established by federal law. The strictly regulated criminal procedural procedure for imposing criminal liability on a person who has committed a crime serves not as a means of retribution for what he has done, but as a way and procedural guarantee of ensuring the legality and validity of bringing him to criminal responsibility, preventing the erroneous recognition of a person who has not committed a crime as guilty. At the same time, the criminal procedural procedure for bringing a person to criminal responsibility is associated with significant restrictions on the rights and freedoms of the accused and the suspect.

The employer is obliged to compensate the employee for material damage caused to him by illegal deprivation of his opportunity to work (Article 234 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). Such liability of the employer occurs if the employee does not receive earnings as a result of:

illegal removal of an employee from work, dismissal or transfer to another job;

the employer's refusal to execute or untimely execution of the decision of the labor dispute settlement body or the state legal labor inspector to reinstate the employee in his previous job;

delays by the employer of the issuance to the employee work book, introducing into the non-correct or non-compliant wording of the reason for dismissal.

According to the legislator, this is an exhaustive list. Until 2006 Art. 234 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation contained an indication of other cases provided for by federal laws and the collective agreement.

Currently, the most common grounds for bringing an employer to liability is illegal suspension from work, dismissal or transfer to another job. Suspension from work, dismissal and transfer to another job are regulated by the current labor legislation. In the cases provided for by Art. 76 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, the employer is obliged to remove, not allow the employee to work. Therefore, most often it is not the very fact of suspending an employee from work that is illegal, but the procedure for applying such suspension is violated, which makes the corresponding order (instruction) of the employer illegal. Thus, when an employee who appears at work in a state of alcoholic, narcotic or other toxic intoxication is removed, his medical examination is not carried out or an act is not drawn up on his appearance in this form at the workplace.

There are frequent cases of transferring an employee at the initiative of the employer to another job without his consent, inducing the employee to agree to a fixed-term contract instead of an employment contract concluded for an indefinite period, or, under the threat of dismissal, switch to part-time work, a working week.

In small businesses, when hiring, employers often do not draw up a work book despite the requirements of the employee.

The employer is liable for damage caused to the property of the employee. Such liability arises in case of damage, damage, loss of outer clothing, headgear, other things belonging to the employee, even if he did not transfer them to the cloakroom for safekeeping. They can be stored at the workplace, on the territory of the organization in specially designated places.

The property of the employee includes monetary values. In local regulations legal acts the obligation of the employer, in case of postponing the vacation, may be provided to compensate the employee for the unreimbursable costs incurred by him for the purchase of tickets, hotel reservations, etc.

The legislator pays special attention to the timely payment of wages and other payments due to the employee.

Ensuring the right of every employee to the timely and full payment of a fair wage, ensuring a worthy existence for him and his family, is enshrined in the Labor Code of the Russian Federation as a basic principle labor law(Art. 2). A similar obligation of the employer is contained in Art. 22 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation: “To pay in full the wages due to employees within the time limits established in accordance with this Code, the collective agreement, the rules of internal work schedule, labor contracts.

In market conditions of managing the delay by the employer of wages is widespread. It has become commonplace. The responsibility of the employer in such cases occurs regardless of his fault.

The legislator has provided a number of guarantees for the employee, encouraging the employer to pay him in a timely manner. So, if the payment of wages is delayed for more than 15 days, the employee has the right, by notifying the employer in writing, to suspend work for the entire period until the payment of the delayed amount (part 2 of article 142 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). In case of untimely payment to the employee of annual paid leave, the employer, upon the written application of the employee, is obliged to postpone such leave for another period agreed with him (part 2 of article 124 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

In case of violation by the employer due date payment of wages, vacation pay and other payments due to the employee, the employer is obliged to additionally pay him monetary compensation in the amount of not less than 1/300 of the current refinancing rate of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation from the delayed amounts for each day, starting from the next day after the deadline up to and including the day of actual settlement. The amount of monetary compensation to an employee may be established by a collective or labor contract. At the same time, it cannot be lower than it is provided for by law (Article 236 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

In cases where financial position the organization does not allow the employer to pay off the employees on time, a debt repayment schedule is drawn up, and in extreme cases, the organization, the employer - an individual is declared bankrupt.

The employer is also liable in case of damage to the life and health of the employee. Such liability is regulated mainly by the norms of civil law.

Violation by an employer of applicable labor laws usually causes an employee mental or physical suffering. Concept definition moral damage in case of violation of the labor rights of workers, it was given in the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated December 20, 1994 No. 10 “Some questions of the application of legislation on compensation for moral damage”. According to the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. moral or physical suffering can be caused by the action or inaction of the employer, infringing on the material benefits belonging to the citizen from birth or by virtue of the law (life, health, personal dignity, business reputation, inviolability privacy, personal and family secrets, etc.) or violating his personal non-property rights (the right to use his name, the right of authorship and other non-property rights in accordance with the law on the protection of rights to the results of intellectual activity) or violating the property rights of citizens.

From the above definition it follows that compensation for moral damage is possible in case of a guilty offense by the employer, firstly, the natural rights of the employee, belonging to him from birth or by virtue of the law, both property and non-property; secondly, his personal non-property rights; thirdly, the property rights of the employee.

An employer’s offense can be expressed in certain actions: it can be discrimination in the field of work, dismissal without a legal basis or in violation of the established procedure, illegal transfer to another job, unreasonable disciplinary action, etc.

Guilty inaction of the employer, violating the rights of the employee, is manifested, for example, in violation of the rules of the technical process (failure to eliminate the malfunction in the equipment, failure to take the necessary measures to provide the employee with raw materials, materials, semi-finished products of proper quality, failure to familiarize him with new or updated technological instructions, labor protection rules, which led to the release of defective products, and, accordingly, a decrease in the employee's earnings).

Guilty inaction of the employer may take place in case of non-execution of decisions of the judicial authorities on the reinstatement of an illegally dismissed employee in his previous job, etc.

Moral damage caused to an employee in the course of work is compensated in cash. Its size is determined by agreement of the parties. If the employee, in negotiations with the employer, could not agree on the need for compensation for non-pecuniary damage, or the parties did not reach an agreement on its size, then the employee can go to court. The court has the right to satisfy the requirements of the employee if the fact of the guilty infliction of moral harm by the employer on him is proved. In this case, the amount of compensation to the employee is determined by the court, regardless of the property damage subject to compensation (part 2 of article 237 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

According to the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the amount of compensation for non-pecuniary damage is determined by the court based on the specific circumstances of each case, taking into account the scope and nature of the moral or physical suffering inflicted on the employee, the degree of guilt of the employer, other noteworthy circumstances, as well as the requirements of reasonableness and justice.

Liability of the parties to labor relations: the responsibility of the employer to the employee

Home > Consultations > legal support > Liability of the parties to labor relations: the responsibility of the employer to the employee

The employer, as a party to an employment contract that caused damage to the other party, is obliged to compensate for it in accordance with the Labor Code of the Russian Federation and other federal laws. The material liability of the parties to the employment contract may be specified by the employment contract or agreements concluded in writing and attached to it. At the same time, the contractual liability of the employer to the employee cannot be lower than that provided for by the Code or other federal laws.

The liability of the employer to the employee is regulated by Chapter 38 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. The liability of the employer is possible in the following cases:

compensation to an employee for material damage caused as a result of illegal deprivation of his opportunity to work: illegal suspension from work (Article 76 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation), illegal transfer (Articles 72, 73), illegal dismissal (Articles 77-84), the employer's refusal to execute or untimely and execution of the decision of the labor dispute resolution body or the state legal labor inspector to reinstate the employee in his previous job (Articles 389, 396, 357), delay in issuing a work book (Article 84.1), inclusion in the labor a book of incorrect or non-compliant wording of the reason for dismissal of an employee (Article 66), failure to comply with the statutory deadlines for warning an employee about an upcoming dismissal (clause 7, Article 77, subparagraphs 1, 2, Article 81, Article 180) and more;
compensation for damage caused to the property of the employee;
compensation for moral damage caused to the employee by unlawful actions (or inaction) of the employer;
in case of violation of the established deadline for the payment of wages and other payments due to the employee (Articles 136, 140-142 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation);
when an employee is harmed by injury, occupational disease or other damage to health associated with the performance of labor duties.

Article 234 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation obliges the employer to reimburse the employee for lost earnings in cases where the employee was deprived of the opportunity to perform his labor duties.

Damage caused by the employer to the property of the employee is compensated on the basis of Art. 235 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. The grounds for bringing the employer to liability under the named article include: damage to clothing in the performance of labor duties; loss of things from the wardrobe or in places designated for storage; loss or damage to other personal property, which, with the consent or knowledge of the employer, is used in the course of work. Damage will be reimbursed in full. With the consent of the employee, the damage can be compensated in kind. The employer is obliged to consider the employee's application for damages and make a decision within ten days. If the employee disagrees with the decision of the employer, he has the right to go to court.

The employer is obliged to compensate in cash the moral damage caused to the employee by illegal actions (for example, in the case of an illegal transfer, illegal dismissal, in case of employment discrimination). The amount of non-pecuniary damage must be determined by the parties to the employment contract. If the employer refuses to compensate moral damage voluntarily, the employee has the right to go to court.

Violation by the employer of the current labor legislation usually causes moral or physical suffering to the employee. The definition of the concept of non-pecuniary damage in case of violation of the labor rights of workers was given in the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated December 20, 1994 No. 10 “Some questions of the application of legislation on compensation for moral damage”. According to the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, moral or physical suffering can be caused by the action or inaction of the employer, infringing on the material benefits belonging to the citizen from birth or by virtue of the law (life, health, personal dignity, business reputation, privacy, personal and family secrets and etc.) or violating his personal non-property rights (the right to use his name, the right of authorship and other non-property rights in accordance with the law on the protection of rights to the results of intellectual activity) or violating the property rights of citizens.

In the Labor Code of the Russian Federation in Art. 236 establishes the rules for the liability of the employer to the employee - for the delay in the payment of wages. In these cases, the employer is obliged to pay all the amounts due to the employee (wages, vacation pay, payments upon dismissal) with the payment of interest (monetary compensation) in the amount of not less than one three hundredth of the current refinancing rate of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation from the amounts not paid on time for each day of delay, starting from the next day after the due date of payment up to and including the day of actual settlement. By Directive of the Bank of Russia No. 2873-U dated September 13, 2012, effective September 14, 2012, the Bank of Russia refinancing rate is set at 8.25% per annum. The amount of compensation may be increased by a collective or labor agreement.

The accrual of interest due to late payment of wages does not exclude the right of the employee to index the amounts of delayed wages due to their depreciation due to inflationary processes, since such indexation is not an independent measure of the employer's responsibility, but a technical mechanism for restoring the purchasing power of money not received by the employee in a timely manner .

An employee may be harmed by injury, occupational disease or other damage to health in the performance of his job duties. Such relations are regulated by the Federal Law of July 24, 1998 "On Mandatory social insurance from accidents at work and occupational diseases” (as amended on September 30, 2015). Compulsory social insurance against accidents at work provides for compensation for harm caused to the life and health of the insured in the performance of his duties under an employment contract by providing the insured in full with all necessary types of insurance coverage, including payment of expenses for medical, social and professional rehabilitation.

Accident at work - an event as a result of which the insured received an injury or other damage to health in the performance of duties under an employment contract and in other cases established by this Federal Law both on the territory of the insured and outside it or while traveling to the place of work or return from the place of work on the transport provided by the insured, and which entailed the need to transfer the insured to another job, temporary or permanent loss of his professional ability to work or his death

The following types of compensation for harm to an employee are possible: compensation for lost earnings, depending on the degree of loss of professional ability to work; reimbursement of additional expenses in connection with a labor injury; lump sum allowance; compensation for moral damage.

Currently, these types of compensation for harm to an employee (except for non-pecuniary damage) are not made by employers from own funds, and the Social Insurance Fund of the Russian Federation (insurer), to which employers (insurers) contribute insurance premiums for the workers. These relations go beyond the scope of labor law, therefore, compensation for harm is regulated by another branch of law - social security law.

§ 2. Liability of the employer to the employee

In the legal literature, there are three groups of cases of the employer's liability to the employee, depending on the violation of the employee's labor rights245.

The first group includes compensation for property damage resulting from a violation by the employer of the employee's right to work.

The second group combines cases of compensation for harm resulting from a violation of the employee's right to health protection, to healthy and safe working conditions in connection with causing him an industrial injury or occupational disease.

The third group includes cases of compensation to the employee for damage caused by the violation by the employer of other rights of the employee in labor relations, for example, the right to protect his personal property, in connection with the failure to ensure the safety of the employee's personal belongings during work.

Among the violations of the rights of workers in labor relations, the most common is the violation of the right to work. In accordance with Article 234 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, the employer is obliged to compensate the employee for earnings that he did not receive in all cases of illegal deprivation of his opportunity to work. Such an obligation, in particular, arises if earnings are not received as a result of: illegal removal of an employee from work, his dismissal or transfer to another job; the employer's refusal to execute or untimely execution of the decision of the labor dispute resolution body or the state legal labor inspector to reinstate the employee in his previous job; delays by the employer in issuing a work book to an employee, entering into the work book an incorrect or inconsistent wording of the reason for dismissal of an employee; in other cases stipulated by federal laws and the collective agreement.

Compensation to an employee for an unrealized opportunity to work and receive, as a result of work, a specific wage, established in accordance with an employment contract, from this or another employer is provided for by Article 165 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. In this case, all earnings not received for the period of time during which the employee is deprived of the opportunity to work according to the terms of the employment contract with this employer or conclude an employment contract with another employer due to the failure to issue a work book to him or the presence of an incorrect wording of the reason for dismissal are subject to compensation.

Earnings for the entire period of time until the employee is reinstated in his previous job or the employer provides the opportunity to start it, as well as earnings for the period of time before the actual issuance of the work book or the correct formulation of the reason for dismissal, will be considered not received. In the latter case, both earnings from this employer for the period from dismissal to the issuance of the work book or the correct wording of it, and earnings from another employer that could have been received by the employee during this period and actually not received by him due to the absence of a work book or an incorrect formulation of the reason for dismissal.

In particular, if it is proved that the date of employment could be the date of issue of the work book or the date closest to it, the wording of the reason for dismissal affected the terms of the concluded employment contract or its conclusion, then the employee, in accordance with Article 394 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, can prove the amount damages based on earnings not received from another employer for the entire period of forced absenteeism, or based on the existence of a difference in earnings for the entire time of performing lower-paid work or probation until the moment corrections are made to the work book246.

If the court recognizes the refusal to hire as illegal, the employee who has been discriminated against or unreasonably refused to conclude an employment contract has the right, if the employer is at fault, to receive compensation for the unrealized opportunity to work in the amount of unrealized earnings from him for the entire period of time until the restoration of his labor rights .

In cases of unlawful suspension from work, transfer of an employee to another job with this employer, only that part of the earnings that the employee did not receive as a result of such suspension or transfer is subject to compensation (the amount of receivable earnings minus that received over the same period of time from this employer) . Other payments received from this employer for the same period of time ( severance pay, temporary disability allowance), are subject to offset when collecting earnings.

The amount of material damage to be compensated by the employer (lost earnings) is proved by the employee. This takes into account information on the size of the average earnings of the employee for the previous period of time, the presence of conditions in employment contract, other evidence. The employer has the right to prove the legality of his actions or inaction, the absence of his fault, including in the event of a delay in issuing a work book. The guilt of the employer is assumed in case of refusal to comply with the decision of the body for the consideration of labor disputes or the state legal labor inspector on the reinstatement of the employee in his previous job and the delay in issuing a work book to the employee.

The second group combines cases of compensation to an employee for harm resulting from a violation of the employee's right to health protection, to healthy and safe working conditions in connection with causing him an industrial injury or occupational disease. These issues are discussed in those sections of this manual that are devoted to guarantees and compensations to employees in case of temporary disability, as well as in case of an accident at work and occupational disease (Articles 183, 184 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

The liability of the employer for damage caused to the property of the employee is provided for by Article 235 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, according to which the employer, who caused damage to the property of the employee, compensates for this damage in full.

In the process of the employee's performance of his labor function or as a result of the impact production factors, the occurrence of emergency or emergency circumstances (fire, collapse of a building) or as a result of the actions of the employer, the employee's property may be damaged. If the damage arose through the fault of the employer, then it is subject to compensation to the employee in full.

The fault of the employer is assumed in cases of failure to fulfill his obligation to ensure safe conditions and labor protection, non-compliance of production facilities and products with labor protection requirements, as well as in cases of damage at the workplace or other place under the control of the employer, by any unknown persons who find themselves there in due to improper provision by the employer of their exclusion from these places. Any property entrusted to the employer for safekeeping must be returned to the employee in the same quantity and condition. The employer is obliged to take measures to preserve and prevent the possibility of causing damage to property, to stop the actions of other employees and other persons that harm him.

The employer is not liable for damage to the employee's property caused as a result of illegal actions of other (known) persons, including other employees. In this case, the harm is compensated by these persons in a civil law manner. The employer is not liable for damage to the property of the employee that occurred in the course of the performance of his labor duties, as a result of an accident or other circumstances that exclude the fault of the employer (force majeure, the fault of the injured employee).

If damage is caused to personal property used by the employee with the consent or knowledge of the employer and in his interests, for which the employee is paid compensation for use, wear and tear and expenses associated with its use, then the employer is liable only for damage in excess of the normal (planned or permissible ) decrease in the value of this property as a result of this use(depreciation established by agreement of the parties). The amount and procedure for compensation for such damage are determined in a written agreement providing for the reimbursement of expenses resulting from the use of the employee's personal property.

The amount of damage is calculated at market prices in force in the area at the time of its compensation.

The employee's claim for damages is sent to the employer. The employer is obliged to consider the received application and make an appropriate decision within ten days from the date of its receipt. If the employee disagrees with the decision of the employer or does not receive a response within the prescribed period, the employee has the right to go to court.

In order to practically implement the principles of legal regulation of labor relations, which consist in the prohibition of forced labor, ensuring the right of each employee to the timely and full payment of fair wages that ensure a decent existence for the employee and his family, the Labor Code of the Russian Federation for the first time defined liability employer for late payment of wages.

According to Article 236 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, liability arises if the employer violates the established deadline for paying wages, vacation pay, payments upon dismissal and other payments due to the employee. The employer is obliged to pay in full the wages due to employees within the time limits established by the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, the collective agreement, the internal labor regulations of the organization, labor contracts. Violation of the established deadlines for the payment of wages or payment of wages not in full are referred to as forced labor. The employer and (or) his representatives, duly authorized by him, who have delayed the payment of wages to employees, are liable in accordance with the Labor Code and other federal laws. Representatives of the employer may be the heads of branches, representative offices and structural divisions of organizations and other employees endowed (by proxy, constituent documents or normative act, act of the governing body) the right to issue wages to employees.

A delay in the payment of wages is considered to be its non-payment on the day established by the internal labor regulations of the organization, the collective agreement, the labor contract, and if the day of payment coincides with a day off or non-working holiday, its non-payment on the eve of this day. Payment days must be set at least during each half of the month, with the exception of certain categories employees for whom federal laws establish other terms for the payment of wages. A delay in payment for a vacation is the payment made later than three days before the start of the vacation.

The delay in payments to the employee upon dismissal, if he worked on the day of dismissal, will be the failure to pay him on that day all the amounts due from the employer. If the employee did not work on the day of dismissal, then the non-payment of the corresponding amounts during the day when the dismissed employee presented the demand for payment, or the day following it, is considered a delay in payments. In this case, the following business day may be recognized as the next day, since the employee’s claim presented in the afternoon on the eve of a weekend or non-working day holiday may be practically impossible through no fault of the employer.

Other payments due to the employee are also subject to monetary compensation in cases of delay in their payment due to the fault of the employer. Other payments are: downtime payment, reimbursement of expenses associated with a business trip, when moving to work in another area, reimbursement of expenses in case of using the employee’s personal property, payment of temporary disability benefits, payment of other compensations.

When establishing guilt, the employer, in accordance with Article 236 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, is obliged to pay all the amounts due to the employee with the payment of interest (monetary compensation) in the amount of not less than one three hundredth of the refinancing rate of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation in force at that time from the amounts not paid on time for each day of delay, starting from the next day after the due date of payment up to and including the day of actual settlement.

In this way, Labor Code The Russian Federation established an increased (compared to Art. 395 Civil Code RF) the responsibility of the employer for the use of the employee's funds. This is due to the stronger position of the employer as a party to labor relations. In the event of a delay in the payment of wages for more than fifteen days, the employee has the right, by notifying the employer in writing, to suspend work for the entire period of time until the payment of the delayed amount, except in special cases247.

The employer is obliged to independently accrue monetary compensation in case of delay in payments to the employee and issue it without any special request from the employee.

In cases where the employer refuses to pay the employee or fails to pay interest, the employee has the right to apply to the labor dispute resolution body (CCC or court) within three months from the date set for payment or from the date of receipt of payment without interest payable. The employee's monetary claims for the payment of interest, if they are recognized as justified, are satisfied in full

The specific amount of monetary compensation for delayed payments due to the employee (not lower than that established by the Labor Code) is determined by the collective or labor contract, and in the absence of a condition for this in them, it is taken equal to that established by the Labor Code of the Russian Federation.

An employee may suffer not only property, in connection with the performance of his labor duties, but also moral harm. In accordance with Article 237 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, moral harm caused to an employee by unlawful actions or inaction of the employer is compensated to the employee in cash in the amount determined by agreement of the parties to the employment contract. According to Article 151 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, moral harm is understood as physical or moral suffering caused by the actions or inaction of the employer, violating the personal non-property rights of the employee or encroaching on other intangible benefits belonging to him.

Thus, the condition for compensation for non-pecuniary damage is the unlawfulness of the actions or omissions of the employer. The Labor Code established the monetary form of compensation and the procedure for determining its size. The amount of compensation for moral damage to an employee is established in each specific case by an agreement between the employee and the employer, and in the event of a dispute between them, it is determined by the court. Regardless of the amount of property damage subject to compensation, the court has the right to satisfy the employee's claim for compensation for moral damage, establishing the fact of its infliction to the employee.

The Labor Code of the Russian Federation and federal laws establish a number of cases in which an employee may be compensated for moral harm. These include cases of dismissal of an employee without a legal basis or in violation of the established procedure for dismissal, illegal transfer to another job, cases of discrimination in the field of work. Moral damage may be subject to compensation in other cases, in particular, in case of violation of the rules governing the processing and protection of the employee's personal data. In accordance with the Federal Law “On Compulsory Social Insurance Against Accidents at Work and Occupational Diseases”248 compensation to the insured person for moral damage caused in connection with an accident at work or occupational disease is carried out by its causer, which primarily means the relevant employer.

The fact of the presence of moral damage, a causal relationship with the unlawful actions or inaction of the employer and the latter's guilt in causing it must be proven by the employee.

The degree of moral or physical suffering is assessed by the court, taking into account the actual circumstances of the infliction of moral harm, the individual characteristics of the victim and other specific circumstances indicating the severity of the suffering suffered by him. The court has the right to consider a claim filed for compensation for moral or physical suffering caused to a person, regardless of the consideration of any property claims, since, under the law, liability for moral harm can be applied both along with property liability and independently249.

LIABILITY:
STEP-BY-STEP PROCEDURE

According to Part 1 of Art. 238 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, the employee is obliged to compensate the employer for the direct actual damage caused to him. Unreceived income (lost profit) is not subject to recovery from the employee.

In accordance with Art. 241 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation for the damage caused, the employee is liable within the limits of his average monthly earnings, unless otherwise provided by the Labor Code of the Russian Federation or other federal laws. According to Part 1 and Part 2 of Art. 242 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, the full liability of the employee consists in his obligation to compensate the direct actual damage caused to the employer in full. Liability in the full amount of the damage caused can be imposed on the employee only in cases provided for by the Labor Code of the Russian Federation or other federal laws.

Stage 1. Establishing the amount of damage, the causes of its occurrence and all the circumstances of the case.

1.1. Checking and documenting the damage and the causes of its occurrence .

To conduct an audit, the employer has the right set up a commission with the participation of relevant experts.

Composition of the commission approved by order.

The commission checks, collects and draws up the necessary documents. Information about damage can be in different documents, for example, in audit reports, inventory reports. It is important to establish not only the fact of damage, but also its size! We also recommend establishing and documenting all the circumstances of the case, which, in the event of disputes, are established by the courts (paragraph 4 of the Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of November 16, 2006 N 52).

Based on the results of the check, a document is drawn up(act of audit or otherwise) (Articles 246, 247 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

All completed and received at this stage documents are registered in the manner prescribed by the employer in the relevant registration logs.

As part of the check, traditionally with an employee Written explanation required in order to determine the cause of the damage. But it can be an independent stage.

1.2. Demanding an explanation from the employee in writing in order to determine the cause of the damage.

The employer prepares for the employee notification of the need to provide a written explanation. The notice is prepared in two copies (one for each of the parties), registered in the manner prescribed by the employer, for example, in the register of notifications and offers to employees. The employer gives one copy of the notice to the employee. On the second copy of the notice (employer's copy), the employee writes that he has read the notice, received one copy, puts the date of receipt, and signs.

If the employee provides a written explanation, then it is considered by the employer (commission) and registered in the manner prescribed by the employer in the relevant registration log.

In case of refusal or evasion of the employee from providing the specified explanation, an appropriate Act(Article 247 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

If the employer has a procedure for registering acts in a special journal, then the signed act must be registered in such a journal.

Stage 2. Recovery from the guilty employee of the amount of damage caused(Article 248 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

Withdrawals can be made in one of the following ways:

2.1. By issuing an order (instruction) to recover the amount of damage not exceeding the average monthly salary. The order may be made no later than one month from the date of the final determination by the employer of the amount of damage caused by the employee. An order (instruction) is registered in the manner prescribed by the employer, for example, in the register of orders (instructions). The employee is introduced to the order (instruction) under the signature.

2.2. By applying to the court with a claim for recovery by the employer in cases where the one-month period has expired from the day the damage was established or the employee does not agree to voluntarily compensate for the damage caused to the employer, and the amount of damage to be recovered from the employee exceeds his average monthly earnings.

2.3. By voluntary compensation by the employee for damages (in money) in cases where the employee agrees to voluntary compensation. Voluntary reimbursement is possible with installment payment. With voluntary compensation, it is necessary to draw up a written obligation of the employee to the employer to compensate for the damage.

The obligation is drawn up in two copies (one for each of the parties), if more copies are not provided for the given employer. The obligation is registered in accordance with the procedure established by the employer in the relevant register.

2.4. By transferring the employee to the employer to compensate for the damage caused by an equivalent property or by repairing the damaged property. Transfer and correction of property in such cases are allowed only with the consent of the employer. The transfer of property is usually an agreement between the employee and the employer. The agreement is drawn up in two copies (one for each of the parties), if more copies are not provided for the given employer. The agreement is registered in the manner prescribed by the employer in the relevant registration log.

P.S. Step by step procedure bringing an employee to liability is taken from the book"130 step-by-step instructions for personnel work"

Mistakes made by the employer when bringing employees to liability:

Conclusion of agreements on full liability with improper persons.

Bringing an employee to liability, while in his actions that caused damage, there is no fault or wrongfulness.

Bringing a member of the team (team) to material liability if it is proven that he is not guilty or not in accordance with the degree of guilt.

The employer did not ensure proper storage of the material assets entrusted to the employee.

The claim to the employee for compensation for damages is presented in the presence of other circumstances that exclude the material liability of the employee (normal economic risk, force majeure, extreme necessity, necessary defense).

Attraction to full financial responsibility of employees from whom it is possible to collect only average earnings for the damage caused.

Unreasonable bringing to liability of one employee from the team, while collective liability is in effect.

Bringing to liability a member of the team (team) is not in accordance with the degree of guilt.

Recovery from the employee, in addition to the damage caused, also lost profits not received by the employer as a result of the actions of the employee

Incorrect determination of the amount of damage caused by the employee to the employer.

A written explanation was not taken from the employee when establishing the cause of the damage.

The employer confuses the rules governing the issues of bringing employees to liability with the rules governing issues of withholding money from employees' wages.

Other violations.

P.S. This material is taken from the book.

What is the assistance of a lawyer or lawyer in labor disputes, associated with bringing employees to liability

The employee can perform any of the above actions independently

Still have questions on the topic "Bringing an employee to liability"?

§ 1. Jurisdiction and cognizance of disputes about material

responsibility of workers. Procedure for going to court

Cases on the liability of employees for damage caused to an organization or an individual with whom they were in labor relations at the time the damage was caused occupy a special place among labor disputes due to their specificity.

The correct resolution of these disputes largely depends on the consideration of those features that are characteristic of the consideration of cases of this category. These features are largely determined by the provisions of labor legislation on labor and, above all, by the articles included in Ch. 39 of the Labor Code.

Unlike most labor disputes, for which it is possible to use an extrajudicial procedure for their resolution (CTS), cases of material liability of workers and employees are considered directly in court.

However, under certain conditions, a claim for damages may not yet be the subject of legal proceedings.

The point is that according to Art. 248 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, compensation for damage in an amount not exceeding the average monthly earnings is made by order of the employer by deduction from wages. The order must be made no later than one month from the date of the final determination by the employer of the amount of damage caused by the employee.

It follows that if the amount of damage caused by the employee does not exceed his average monthly earnings and the employer has not lost the opportunity to issue an order for compensation for damage by deducting this employee from the wages of this employee, he is not entitled to file a claim.

In cases where an employee who has caused damage in an amount not exceeding his average monthly earnings has terminated the employment relationship, the employer is no longer entitled to issue an order for compensation for damage by deduction from his salary. Even if one month has not passed since the date of establishing the amount of damage, the employer can file a claim with the court.

Thus, claims against an employee for compensation of actual damage not exceeding his average monthly earnings are considered in court if: 1) the employee terminated his employment relationship with this enterprise; 2) in cases where compensation cannot be made by order of the administration by deduction from wages; 3) when the claim for damages exceeds the average monthly salary of the employee.

One of the main issues of legal proceedings is the question of jurisdiction. To determine the jurisdiction of a case on the material liability of an employee means to find out in which of the courts of first instance it should be considered. From the point of view of tribal jurisdiction, cases are considered by a justice of the peace. As for territorial jurisdiction, then, according to the general rule enshrined in Art. 28 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the jurisdiction of civil cases is determined by the place of residence of the defendant. With a claim against the employee for compensation for material damage, the employer applies to the magistrate who serves the site where the defendant permanently or predominantly lives.

For the administration to apply to the court for compensation for material damage caused by an employee, a period of one year is set from the date of discovery of the damage caused (Article 392 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). When checking compliance with the deadlines stipulated by law for applying to the court, it should be taken into account that the start of the indicated deadlines is the day following the day when the damage became known. If these deadlines are missed and the defendant initiates a dispute on the application of the limitation period, the employer has the right to file a petition for their restoration. In case of missing the specified deadlines for a good reason, the justice of the peace restores them. Missing the deadline for applying to the court can be recognized as valid, for example, when it is caused by the need to conduct inspections, audits, investigations, etc., on the fact of causing damage, which took a long time. The question of the reasons for missing the deadline, if it took place and the defendant insists on the application of the limitation period, may be resolved in a preliminary court session (Article 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

Special requirements apply to the content of the statement of claim. It indicates the amount of direct actual damage caused, according to the plaintiff, by the defendant; Circumstances are given that point to the illegal action (inaction) of the employee, to a causal relationship between the illegal action (inaction) of the employee and the resulting direct actual damage, to the fault of the defendant in causing damage; reference must be made to specific evidence. The application also indicates the type of liability borne by the defendant (full, limited); the amount to be recovered from him in compensation for damage; on what evidence is based the conclusion about the type of liability and the amount of the amount to be recovered. Mandatory in statement of claim the calculation of the amount of damage sought by the employer is given.

The application may include phone numbers, fax numbers, addresses Email the plaintiff, his representative, the defendant, other information relevant to the consideration and resolution of the case, as well as the petitions of the plaintiff.

If a claim is brought against several defendants, then the statement contains data characterizing the degree of guilt of each of them in causing damage, and a calculation is made of the proportion each defendant must compensate for it, taking into account the degree of guilt, type and limit of liability.

In support of the arguments set forth in the statement of claim, attached to it job descriptions defining labor function defendant; evidence confirming the amount of damage and causing it through the fault of the defendant (reports, explanations, acts of inspections, technical opinions, accounting data, acts of audits, waybills, invoices, collation statements, orders for bringing to disciplinary responsibility, etc.) . According to the requirements for imposing full liability on the employee, the statement of claim is accompanied (depending on the basis): copies of the verdict on the fact of a criminally punishable act and the guilt of the persons who committed it; an agreement on full individual or collective (team) liability; a one-time power of attorney or another one-time document by which the employee received material assets; evidence of damage caused by an employee while intoxicated or not in the performance of work duties, etc. In confirmation of the size of the average earnings, as well as the financial situation of the defendant, a certificate of wages received by him is attached to the statement of claim.

To characterize the financial situation of the defendant, the judge also submits or requests, at the request of the interested party, certificates of wages of family members, data on the presence of dependents, property, etc.

Depending on the nature of the stated requirements, other documents may be attached to the application.

A statement of claim for compensation for material damage caused by an employee is paid with a state fee in the amount established by the provisions of Ch. 25.3 "State duty" of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation (Part Two) dated August 5, 2000 N 117-FZ (as amended on December 30, 2004).

The state fee is not paid when filing claims for compensation for material damage caused by a crime. The commission of a criminally prosecuted act must be confirmed by a court verdict that has entered into legal force.

According to the rules established by Art. 98 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the amount of state duty paid by the enterprise when filing a statement of claim is subject to recovery from the employee in favor of the plaintiff upon satisfaction of the claim. If the employer is exempted from paying the state duty when filing a statement of claim, then the duty is collected from the employee in the state revenue. This rule also applies to the case when a claim for damages is filed in a criminal case and the specified claim is satisfied by a court verdict. Court expenses (including the state duty) shall be reimbursed in the cases provided for by law at the expense of the convicts in a shared ratio of the amounts of damages proportionally recovered from each of them. In cases where convicts are held jointly and severally liable, reimbursement of court expenses is also made on a shared basis, taking into account the guilt, degree of responsibility and property status of each of the convicts.

§ 2. Parties and third parties in cases

for damages

The parties in cases of material liability of employees are the subjects of a disputed labor relationship. As a rule, the organization that suffered the damage and at the same time has the rights of a legal entity acts as a plaintiff. The plaintiff may also individual who is an employer.

Since the right to bring a claim belongs to an organization that is legal entity, endowed in the aggregate with procedural legal capacity and procedural capacity, production units and branches of the organization cannot be claimants in disputes on compensation for material damage caused by a person working in this unit or branch.

The question of the defendant is inextricably linked with the question of the subject of liability under labor law. The correct definition of the subject of responsibility allows not only to clarify the law that should be followed in resolving the dispute, but also to involve the proper defendant in the case.

The subject of material liability under labor law can only be an employee, i.e. a person who is in an employment relationship with the enterprise at the time of the damage. If the defendant is not such, then he cannot bear property liability according to the rules of the legislation on material liability of employees (Articles 238-250 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). In these cases, the dispute does not acquire the features of both a material and procedural order, which are characteristic of cases of material liability of an employee. Sometimes cases that arise as a dispute about liability lose their original character and acquire features characteristic of other disputes in lawsuit proceedings. This happens, in particular, if it is necessary to replace the wrong party (defendant) or leave him from the process due to death. In the event of the death of the subject of liability, the case cannot be terminated if the obligation to compensate for the damage caused to the enterprise through the fault of the employee passes to another person - the heir of the deceased. According to Art. 215 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the court is obliged to suspend the proceedings in the event of the death of a citizen, if the disputed legal relationship allows succession. Having established the heir who accepted the inheritance, the court involves him to participate in the case as a defendant. It is noteworthy that the resolution of such a dispute is based on the application of substantive law both in the field of labor and civil law. The court comes to the conclusion about the obligation of the successor of the deceased employee to compensate for the damage by examining the question of the existence of conditions under which liability arises, the type of liability and its limits, the amount that could be recovered from the employee. Having established these circumstances, the court proceeds to ascertain the existence of legal facts with which the norms of civil law associate the obligation of heirs to answer for the debts of the testator. Issues of procedural succession in this case are decided by the court in accordance with the provisions of Art. 44 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation by issuing an appropriate definition. At the same time, all actions performed prior to the entry of the assignee into the process are obligatory for him to the extent that they would be obligatory for the person whom the assignee replaced. However, it should be borne in mind that if the amount of the claim exceeds 500 minimum wages, then this case, from the point of view of generic jurisdiction, will already fall within the competence of the district court.

In some cases, there is a need to expand the circle of defendants. So, if, during the consideration of the case, it is established that the damage was caused not only through the fault of the employee against whom the claim is filed, but also through the fault of another employee of this organization, the justice of the peace, at the request of the plaintiff, must decide on the involvement of this person to participate in the case as second defendant. In this case, it is possible to assign in appropriate shares the obligation to compensate for damage to both defendants, taking into account the degree of their guilt, the type and limits of liability.

Unlike other cases of action proceedings, third parties are relatively rarely involved in cases of material liability of employees. There are practically no cases when other organizations make independent demands on the subject of the dispute. As a rule, the decision on damages disputes does not affect the rights and obligations of other persons. As an exception, one can name cases on claims against materially responsible persons to whom valuables were transferred for safekeeping along with other employees who refused to compensate for losses in the amount of their share due on a voluntary basis. For example, in case of collective (team) financial liability, two members of the brigade compensated for the damage on a voluntary basis, one member of the brigade gave a written obligation to pay off the damage in the near future, and two members evade compensation for damage (Article 245 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). The lawsuit was filed against the latter. But the involvement of the rest of the team seems necessary. The fact is that collective (team) material responsibility assumes that the brigade as a whole, and not each member of it individually, takes full financial responsibility for all material assets transferred to the brigade under the report. All members of the team are bound by a common inseparable obligation. The repayment of damages by one of them in a share determined by the administration does not yet indicate the fulfillment by this person of the duty fully entrusted to him, if the question of the responsibility of other members of the brigade has not yet been finally resolved. A different point of view in practice can lead to the fact that when some members of the team are released from the obligation to compensate for damage (for example, in the absence of their fault), it will remain outstanding. In addition, a different distribution between the subjects of collective (brigade) liability of a specific amount of damage is possible, than was determined by the administration in its calculation at the beginning. Involvement in the case of financially responsible persons who voluntarily paid a certain part of the damage caused, on the one hand, contributes to its full compensation (in the event that other members of the team are exempted from liability in whole or in part), and on the other hand, this is also in the interests of the employees themselves, since it allows them, using the rights of a participant in the process, to protect themselves from unjustified deductions from them of amounts exceeding their share.

But in what capacity should these persons be involved in the case? Practice answers this question in different ways. In some cases - as third parties who do not declare an independent claim regarding the subject of the dispute, in others (such are the majority) - as co-defendants. Although the second solution is the most common, it is not justified in all cases. The fact is that the system of moral and legal norms stimulates the voluntary fulfillment of the obligations that a person has. The institution of material responsibility of workers is no exception. So, in accordance with Art. 248 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, the employee who caused the damage can voluntarily compensate it in full or in part. Coercion acts as a consequence of the refusal to voluntarily fulfill an obligation. The prospect of being brought as a defendant in a case, regardless of whether the employee voluntarily compensated part of the damage within the share determined by the employer or refuses to do so, does not contribute to the repayment of losses without recourse to the judicial authorities. Attracting the same specified persons as third parties without independent claims on the side of the defendants is devoid of this shortcoming. If the court comes to the conclusion that the amount paid voluntarily by third parties is less than the share to be recovered from them, then they, by court order, pass into a new procedural quality - they become defendants. But here the trial must begin anew. This is the downside of this development.

§ 3. Preparation of cases for trial

The task of civil proceedings is the correct and timely consideration and resolution of civil cases. The fulfillment of this task is impossible without clarification of all the factual circumstances that are essential for the resolution of the dispute.

The main means of knowing the actual circumstances with which the law associates the emergence, change and termination of the rights and obligations of participants in legal relations are evidence. Evidential activity is carried out on the basis of the rules of relevance, admissibility of evidence, as well as the rules for the distribution of responsibilities for proof, enshrined in law.

Evidential activity begins already when preparing a case for trial. The question of what specific procedural means of proof, containing information about the circumstances of the case, should have a justice of the peace, is subject to the fullest possible resolution. The achievement of the goal for which the preparation of the case for trial depends on this. Since at this stage of the process evidence must be collected and everything superfluous that clutters the process must be eliminated, when selecting evidence, it is necessary to proceed from their relevance and admissibility.

The rule of relevance of evidence states: the court accepts only evidence that is relevant for the consideration and resolution of the case (Article 59 of the Code of Civil Procedure). With regard to cases of material liability of employees, such evidence includes those that can confirm or refute the assertion that there are conditions for imposing liability (actual damage, unlawful behavior of the employee, a causal relationship between the actual damage and the unlawful behavior of the employee, the employee’s fault in causing damage), give a clear picture of the circumstances of the damage, indicate the facts that affect the type of liability and the amount of damage to be compensated from a particular employee, identify the causes and conditions that contribute to the occurrence of damage.

Compliance with the rules of the relevance of evidence allows you to correctly determine the amount of evidentiary material, to select from everything that is presented, only those evidence that are really necessary to establish the actual circumstances of the case. Meanwhile, in practice, there are cases when magistrates violate the rule of relevance of evidence, investigating and even basing a decision on factual circumstances that are outside the range of issues to be clarified in cases of liability. Thus, circumstances are clarified and reflected in the court decision that characterize the defendant's previous labor activity, participation in the public life of the team, his family and financial situation at the time of the commission of illegal actions that led to the occurrence of damage, and not at the time of resolving the dispute, etc.

It is equally unacceptable to accept evidence or to examine it in cases where it cannot be a means of proof according to this case. We are talking about compliance with the rules of admissibility of evidence, which consists in the fact that the facts to be established can be confirmed by evidence obtained using any procedural means of proof provided for by law, with the exception of those circumstances that must be established with the help of strictly defined evidence. When resolving cases of material liability of employees, it is necessary to establish certain legal facts with the help of certain means of proof.

So, with full liability (clause 5 of article 243 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation), the fact that an employee has committed a criminally punishable act cannot be confirmed by anything other than a court verdict. Even if the justice of the peace, considering the case in a civil procedure, comes to the conclusion that there are signs of a crime in the actions of the employee, he cannot base this conclusion on full liability without confirmation by the court that considered the criminal case.

Having found signs of a crime in the actions of the defendant, the justice of the peace informs the prosecutor about this (Article 226 of the Code of Civil Procedure). In these cases, it is possible, in accordance with Art. 215 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation suspension of proceedings in a civil case on compensation for damage caused by an employee.

The fact that an employee has concluded an agreement on full liability (Article 244 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation) can only be confirmed by submitting this agreement drawn up in writing, and the receipt by an employee of material assets under a one-time document (clause 2 of Article 243 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation) by presenting the original of this document . When a claim is filed for the full liability of an employee on the grounds that the defendant committed an administrative offense, a decision on bringing the employee to administrative responsibility must be attached to the statement of claim.

According to the general rule of distribution of the burden of proof, each party must prove the circumstances to which it refers as the basis for its claims and objections. This general rule also applies in resolving cases of material liability, since there are no special rules for the distribution of proving duties in labor law norms. At the same time, its application has its own specifics, which is due to the peculiarities of labor relations and the nature of the claims brought against the employee.

The employer, being a party to the employment contract and carrying out production and economic activities, controls the quantity and quality of the employee’s work, monitors the proper performance of his labor duties, the safety and expenditure of property and other valuables, keeps records of them, etc. Having the production, technical and administrative apparatus necessary to perform these functions, the employer, unlike the employee, must have sufficient data on the presence and amount of actual damage, on the causes of its occurrence, on the unlawful guilty action (inaction) of the employee. It should be noted that according to Art. 247 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, before making a decision on compensation for damage by a specific employee, the employer is obliged to conduct an audit to establish the amount of damage caused and the reasons for its occurrence. To conduct such an inspection, the employer has the right to create a commission with the participation of relevant specialists. It is mandatory to request an explanation from employees in writing to establish the causes of damage. The employee's refusal to give such an explanation must find appropriate support (an act, a memorandum of the person present at the request for an explanation from the employee, etc.).

When considering a case on material liability, one cannot proceed from equal opportunities for the plaintiff and the defendant to present evidence. In this regard, the organization, as a plaintiff in the case and as a participant civil process, having a greater opportunity to prove, is obliged to refer and provide at the disposal of the justice of the peace evidence of the existence of the grounds and conditions under which the material liability of a particular employee occurs, justify the type and extent of such liability, as well as the specific amount to be recovered from the defendant (defendants).

However, when an employee assumes full financial responsibility for the safety of the property entrusted to him on the basis of a written agreement concluded with the employer, the employee’s fault in causing damage is assumed. This is due to the nature of the relationship of the employee with the values entrusted to him and other property, with a certain independence of the operations he carries out for the acceptance, storage, accounting and transfer of property to other persons, the expediency and necessity of which in a particular situation can be very difficult to verify.

Similarly, the issue is resolved when an employee receives property and other valuables against a report under a one-time power of attorney or other one-time documents. In these cases, the employer is not obliged to prove the fault of the employee, and the latter himself must provide evidence that the damage was not caused by his fault.

Of course, this does not mean that in other cases the defendant does not have to prove anything. So, if the employee refers to the specific situation in which the damage occurred, as a circumstance that prevents him from properly fulfilling the duties assigned to him, or to his financial situation, which significantly complicates or makes it impossible to recover damages in the amount that is due to the volume damage, type and limits of liability (Article 250 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation), then he must substantiate his arguments with the presentation of relevant evidence or indicate to the court where this evidence can be obtained.

In the process of preparing the case for trial, the justice of the peace has the right to apply measures to secure the claim. Of particular importance is the performance of these procedural actions in cases of material liability of workers and employees for damage caused by mismanagement, theft, shortage. In these cases, it is necessary to take urgent measures to seize the property and cash belonging to the defendant, as well as simultaneously take other measures. Measures to secure a claim are taken at the request of the persons participating in the case, and securing a claim is allowed in any state of the case. The decision on the issue of taking measures to secure the claim is made without notifying the defendant and other persons participating in the case.

In order to prepare the case for trial or during the court session itself to resolve a dispute about the material liability of an employee, a justice of the peace has to decide whether to accept a counterclaim. Such a need arises when the employee-defendant in a claim for compensation for pecuniary damage makes a claim against the employer for the recovery of wages. Such a claim, as directed towards the set-off of the initial claim, may be accepted for joint consideration with the initial claim, provided that the employee complies with the procedure for preliminary out-of-court settlement of a labor dispute on the recovery of wages.

In some cases, in violation of the established procedure (without a court decision when recovering damages in an amount exceeding the average monthly earnings of an employee, or with the passage of the monthly period provided for in Article 248 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, when the damage does not exceed the average monthly earnings), the employer deducts from wages payment of the employee in compensation for the damage caused by him. In such a situation, an employee who does not agree with the deduction or its amount has the right to bring a claim against the employer for the return of illegally (in his opinion) amounts withheld from wages. Such an appeal to the justice of the peace is carried out by the employee directly, without resorting to the jurisdiction of the CCC, since, according to Part 3 of Art. 248 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, if the employer fails to comply with the established procedure for recovering damages by his own power, the employee has the right to appeal against the actions of the employer in court.

When resolving this claim, the justice of the peace does not have the right to enter into a discussion of the question of the guilt of the employee, but only checks that the organization complies with the procedure for deducting from wages. However, the employer may, in this process, make a counterclaim for the recovery of damage from the employee, referring to the existence of conditions under which liability arises. In accepting this claim for joint consideration with the original claim, the justice of the peace resolves both claims in full.

At the stage of preparing the case for trial, a preliminary court session is held (Article 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure), at which, in particular, the issue of the reasons for missing the plaintiff to go to court with a claim against the employee ( former employee) on compensation for material damage, on the sufficiency of the evidence collected in the case to resolve the case on the merits, petitions and applications were discussed, the proceedings on the case were completed without a decision being made. However, if the plaintiff misses the deadline for applying to the court without good reasons in a preliminary court session, a court decision may be issued to dismiss the claim.

§ 4. Judicial proceedings and judgment

Litigation of cases on material liability of an employee is subject to the general rules of civil proceedings.

As for the content of the decision in cases of liability, it must first of all meet the general requirements specified in Art. 198 Code of Civil Procedure.

The introductory part of the decision contains information about the time of the decision, the name of the court, the names and initials of the justice of the peace, the secretary, the prosecutor and the lawyer, if the latter participate in the case, the case was considered in an open or closed court session, the date of the decision, the name of the case under consideration, by which organization the claim was filed (its full name), if the claim was filed by the prosecutor, then it is indicated in whose interests it is filed, all defendants are listed, both indicated in the statement of claim and those involved in the case (full surname, name and patronymic), given claim amount.

The descriptive part of the decision sets out the demands that the organization has filed, on which it bases its claim, in what amount the defendant or each of the defendants, in the opinion of the plaintiff, is obliged to compensate for the damage; if the established Art. 392 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, the term for filing a claim for compensation for material damage, then for what reasons the plaintiff asks to restore it.

If another person not listed in the statement of claim was involved as a co-defendant or second defendant, then this should be indicated in the descriptive part of the decision.

Then the attitude of each of the defendants to the claims presented is set out, whether the claim is recognized in full or in part, in what amount, what their objections to the claim consist of.

The opinions of other persons involved in the case are also given.

The reasoning part of the decision shall indicate the circumstances established by the justice of the peace, whether there are grounds and conditions under which material liability of workers and employees occurs, what is the amount of the actual damage, which confirms the damage itself and its size, which expressed the unlawful guilty action (inaction) of the defendant, what is the causal relationship of the action (inaction) with the actual damage, on what evidence the conclusions set forth in the decision are based, why the evidence that the justice of the peace rejects cannot be used as the basis for the decision, what type of material liability (full or limited) the defendant should be brought to or each of the defendants, what specific law provides for this liability. The decision must necessarily contain a calculation of the amount to be recovered from the employee (from each of them).

If the justice of the peace does not agree with the arguments of the plaintiff or the defendant or other persons participating in the case, the decision sets out the motives and evidence of such disagreement.

Upon the restoration of the period provided for by Art. 392 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, data are provided that testify to the respectfulness of his pass.

In cases where the court, taking into account the degree of guilt, the specific circumstances under which the damage was caused, or the financial situation of the employee, comes to the conclusion that the amount of damage to be compensated can be reduced, the decision sets out the reasons for reducing the amount. At the same time, however, it should be taken into account that the reduction of the amount of damage subject to compensation is not allowed if the damage was caused by a crime committed for mercenary purposes.

If, when considering a claim filed on the grounds of Art. 241 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation (limited liability), circumstances will be established with which the law associates the onset of full liability at the request of the plaintiff who increased his claims, the justice of the peace may, by his decision, oblige the defendant to compensate for the damage in full. As a general rule, when causing damage through the fault of several defendants, the justice of the peace in the decision determines their obligation to compensate for the damage in a shared ratio, taking into account the degree of guilt, type and limit of liability. However, if it is established by a court verdict that the damage was caused by the joint intentional actions of several employees or by an employee and another person who is not in an employment relationship with the enterprise, then the decision imposes joint and several liability on these persons.

In the course of civil proceedings, the world court has the right to oblige these persons to compensate for the damage jointly and severally, when, upon passing a guilty verdict, the civil claim was left without consideration or the verdict in part of the civil claim was canceled, and the case in this part was sent for a new consideration in civil proceedings.

At the same time, the court has the right to impose on the defendants, whose joint actions caused damage, shared, and not joint and several liability, if such a recovery procedure is in the interests of the plaintiff and provides compensation for damage.

In the operative part of the decision, when the claim is satisfied, the amount recovered from the defendant (from each of the defendants) in favor of the plaintiff, the amount of court expenses to be reimbursed at the expense of the defendant in favor of the plaintiff or to the state revenue (if the plaintiff is exempted from paying state duty) shall be indicated. In case of partial satisfaction of the claim, it is indicated which part of the claim is denied. The name of the plaintiff and the last name, first name, patronymic of the defendant are given in full.

The possibility of ending the case on compensation for material damage caused by the employee without a decision is not ruled out. So, if the defendant voluntarily compensated the damage before the decision was made, the company has the right to refuse the claim. After checking the grounds for such a refusal, the justice of the peace issues a ruling to terminate the proceedings in accordance with Art. 220 Code of Civil Procedure and, at the request of the plaintiff, recover in his favor from the defendant (defendants) the court costs incurred in the case (part 1, article 101 of the Code of Civil Procedure). The employer also has the right to refuse the claim even if the employee does not compensate for the damage voluntarily, since according to Art. 240 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, the employer has the right, taking into account the specific circumstances under which the damage was caused, to fully or partially refuse to recover it from the guilty employee.

When considering cases of compensation by employees for damage, the justice of the peace should pay attention to identifying the causes and conditions that contribute to the occurrence of damage. Having discovered during the consideration of the case violations of the law or significant shortcomings in the work of the organization, in the activities of the institutions, the court shall issue in accordance with Art. 226 of the Code of Civil Procedure is a private definition, which raises the question of taking the necessary measures aimed at eliminating the identified shortcomings. About the measures taken by the organization or officials, to whom a private ruling has been sent, are obliged to inform the court within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the private ruling.

Chapter 3. FEATURES OF CONSIDERATION AND PERMISSION