On behalf of the Russian Federation
of July 8, 2021 No. 33-P
On the case of check of constitutionality of Item 1 of Article 242 and Item 2 of Article 1083 of the Civil code of the Russian Federation in connection with the claim of Kompleks limited liability company
Constitutional court of the Russian Federation as a part of the Chairman V. D. Zorkin, judges K. V. Aranovsky, 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 (the part Item "and" 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",
Reason for consideration of the case was the claim of Kompleks limited liability company. 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 V. G. Yaroslavtsev, having researched the submitted documents and other materials, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation
1. The Kompleks limited liability company (further also - Kompleks LLC, Society) disputes constitutionality of following provisions of the Civil code of the Russian Federation:
Item 1 of Article 242, according to which in cases of natural disasters, accidents, epidemics, epizooty and under other circumstances having extreme character, the property for the benefit of society according to the decision of state bodies can be withdrawn from the owner according to the procedure and on the conditions established by the law with payment of property value to it (requisition);
Item 2 of Article 1083, owing to which if rough imprudence of the victim promoted origin or increase in harm, then depending on degree of contributory guilt and the causer of harm the amount of compensation shall be reduced (paragraph one); in case of rough imprudence of the victim and lack of fault of the causer of harm in cases when its responsibility comes irrespective of fault, the amount of compensation shall be reduced or can be refused indemnification if the law does not provide other; in case of damnification of life or to health of the citizen the refusal in indemnification is not allowed (paragraph two); the contributory guilt is not considered in case of compensation of additional expenses, in case of indemnification in connection with the death of the supporter, and also in case of expense recovery for burial (the paragraph third).
Disclaimer! This text was translated by AI translator and is not a valid juridical document. No warranty. No claim. More info
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
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.