Document from CIS Legislation database © 2003-2020 SojuzPravoInform LLC

On behalf of the Russian Federation

RESOLUTION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

of October 15, 2020 No. 41-P

On the case of check of constitutionality of part 4 of Article 3. 7, Articles 25.1 - 25.5.1 and parts 1 of article 30.12 of the Russian Federation Code of Administrative Offences in connection with the claim of the foreign company "Majena Shipping Company Limited"

Constitutional court of the Russian Federation as a part of the Chairman V. D. Zorkin, judges K. V. Aranovsky, N. S. Bondar, G. A. Gadzhiyev, L. M. Zharkova, S. M. Kazantsev, S. D. Knyazev, A. N. Kokotov, L. O. Krasavchikova, S. P. Mavrin, N. V. Melnikov, Yu. D. Rudkin, V. G. Yaroslavtsev,

being guided by Article 125 (part 4) Constitutions of the Russian Federation, Item 3 parts one, parts three and the fourth Article 3, Article part one 21, Articles 36, 47.1, 74, 86, 96, 97 and 99 Federal constitutional Laws "About the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation",

considered in meeting without carrying out hearing case on check of constitutionality of part 4 of Article 3. 7, Articles 25.1 - 25.5.1 and parts 1 of the article 30.12 Administrative Code of the Russian Federation.

Reason for consideration of the case was the claim of the foreign company "Majena Shipping Company Limited". The basis to consideration of the case was the found uncertainty in question of whether there correspond the Constitutions of the Russian Federation disputed by the applicant of legislative provision.

Having heard the message of the judge-speaker K. V. Aranovsky, having researched the submitted documents and other materials, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation

established:

1. The foreign company "Majena Shipping Company Limited" disputes constitutionality of part 4 of the article 3.7 "Confiscation of the Tool of Making or Subject of Administrative Offence", the articles 25.1 "Person concerning Whom Proceeedings about Administrative Offence Are Conducted", 25.2 "Victim", 25.3 "Legal representatives of physical person", 25.4 "Legal representatives of the legal entity", 25.5 "The defender and the representative", 25.5.1 "The Comissioner for the President of the Russian Federation on protection of the rights of entrepreneurs" and part 1 of the article 30.12 "The Right to Appeal, Protest Taken Legal Effect of the Resolution on the case of Administrative Offence, Decisions by results of Consideration of Claims, Protests" Administrative Code of the Russian Federation.

1.1. Kristall Marin LLC - the partner of the foreign company "Majena Shipping Company Limited" under the agreement of bare-boat charter imported on customs area of the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) according to customs procedure of temporary import the tug boat Marinus belonging to the applicant. In further Kristall Marin LLC gave this vessel of Siemay Alfa Offshor LLC under the agreement of the time-charter to absence to that permissions of customs authority.

The judge's ruling of Proletarian district court of the city of Rostov-on-Don of June 10, 2019 which took legal effect on July 13, 2019 Siemay Alfa Offshor LLC found guilty of making of administrative offense, stipulated in Article 16.21 "Illegal use of goods, their acquisition, storage or transportation" the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, and to it administrative penalty in the form of administrative penalty with confiscation of tug boat Marinus was imposed.

The foreign company "Majena Shipping Company Limited" appealed to the Rostov regional court with the claim to this resolution, believing that additional administrative punishment in the form of confiscation of subject of the administrative offense (belonging to it vessels) is disproportionate to nature and effects of committed administrative offense and Siemay Alfa Offshor LLC without reasons for need for it is appointed.

Production according to the claim of the representative of the foreign company "Majena Shipping Company Limited" to the specified resolution was stopped by the resolution of the vice-chairman of the Rostov regional court of November 15, 2019 on the ground that the company does not treat persons who have the right to appeal it.

According to the applicant, the disputed legislative provisions do not correspond to Articles 19 (part 1), 35 (part 1), 45 (part 1) and 46 (parts 1 and 2) Constitutions of the Russian Federation as do not allow the owner of the property seized based on the decree issued concerning other person on the case of administrative offense to appeal this resolution.

1.2. According to Articles 74, 96 and 97 Federal constitutional Laws "About the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation" the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, checking according to the claim of consolidation of citizens constitutionality of the law or its separate provisions applied in specific case which consideration is complete in court, and affecting constitutional rights and freedoms to which violation the applicant refers accepts the resolution only in the subject specified in the claim and only concerning that part of the act which constitutionality is called into question, estimating both literal sense of the considered legislative provisions, and the sense given them by official and other interpretation or the developed law-enforcement practice and also proceeding from their place in system of precepts of law, without being connected in case of decision making by the bases and arguments stated in the claim.

Warning!!!

This is not a full text of document! Document shown in Demo mode!

If you have active License, please Login, or get License for Full Access.

With Full access you can get: full text of document, original text of document in Russian, attachments (if exist) and see History and Statistics of your work.

Get License for Full Access Now

Disclaimer! This text was translated by AI translator and is not a valid juridical document. No warranty. No claim. More info

Effectively work with search system

Database include more 50000 documents. You can find needed documents using search system. For effective work you can mix any on documents parameters: country, documents type, date range, teams or tags.
More about search system

Get help

If you cannot find the required document, or you do not know where to begin, go to Help section.

In this section, we’ve tried to describe in detail the features and capabilities of the system, as well as the most effective techniques for working with the database.

You also may open the section Frequently asked questions. This section provides answers to questions set by users.

Search engine created by SojuzPravoInform LLC. UI/UX design by Intelliants.