My CV and scientific and practice works on law.: 2009

Hello, my dear prospective client. I offer the following services: drawing contracts, agreements of exchanging the rights of creditor for shares or any other participation in the equity capital of debtor, mergers and acquisitions, peace agreements in court trials and the like. Also consultations on Russian law. Languages: English, French, Italian, Russian.
No percents fee charge, just clerk’s costs.
Sincerely yours, Maxim Zuzin.

ResumeMaxim Yuryevich ZuzinGorkoff Street, house 14-B-2, Shushenskoe, Russiatel.: 7(39139) 35887, fax:7(39139)35887, mobile: 89509788794e-mail: zuzinmaxim@mail.ru Experience: September 2004-till the present timeThe lawyer and interpreter of English and French in Tourist Agency of Shushenskoe – legal consulting of the business and the work of a guide with foreign tourists.October 2003-September 2004 The lawyer in The Shushensky transportation and repair company - arbitration lawsuits. September 2002 – March 2003 The leading specialist in the department of State property of the administration of Ust-Abakansky district. Participation in the arbitration lawsuits, legal advises to the executive staff of the administration. August 2001 – September 2002The main specialist in The Shushensky district filial of The State justice office of The chamber of the State registration of rights and transactions in real estate on the territory of Krasnoyarsky kray. Legal expertise of the documents received. August 2000 – August 2001 The lawyer in The Shushensky transportation and repair company -an enterprise in the sphere of the auto-transportation of hardware goods in our town and the whole region. Civil and arbitration lawsuits and interior labor disputes. Legal consulting of the administration.Education:September 1996- July 2001The Khackasia State University, Abakan, Russia, the degree of lawyer of the profession of jurisprudence.Language practice as an interpreter: (English and French as working languages)Sayano-Shushensky Biosphere Reserve (2000-2002) – working as a translator with trophy hunters, students, scientists, cameramen, writers, tourists on case by case basis. Wild World Fund (2001-2002)- co-authorship in writing a book in English on the nature, history and folklore of the region for a project financed by WWF grant. Syanogorsk Aluminum plant (March 2003) – participation in negotiations for deliverance of the technology from the Canadian contractor to Russian aluminum company.
Sayan Ring Ethnic Music Festival (July 2003) – translating for the English speaking participants and jury members.
The experience of the technical translating: Translating of automobile, TV, audio, video and radio technical documentation. Also fluent in French and Italian.
Hobbies: I have wrote two books of the short stories and poems in English (“Beyond reasonable doubt” and “Back side of the moon”)

My scientific research works on the law:

The provocation of crime as a wrong act
What means the absence of a special legal norm in the Penal Code of Russian Federation, which should establish the responsibility for the provocation of crime? The gap in the criminal law or the qualified passing over this point in silence by the lawgiver? Is it necessary to consider this act as a crime? Or else, that is a situation when the interference of the legislator is superfluous and even harmful?
The basic principle of the accessory theory of complicity consists in the requirement of the identity of the criminal law fate of the people who act jointly in the framework of a certain crime. This point is embodied in the Article 33 of the Penal Code of Russian Federation that concretizes the effect of the Article 8 of the Penal Code of Russian Federation, in reference to the case of complicity, which establishes the common basis of the penal responsibility for all accomplices: they answer for their crime in the limits of the article of the special part of the Penal Code of Russian Federation, which is imputed to the executor. However, in opposition to the accessory theory of objective imputing, the Russian criminal law professes the principle of the responsibility on the basis of the subjective imputing: according to Articles 5,24,32 of the Penal Code of Russian Federation, an act of accomplices is qualified the same way as the act of the executor only in the case if the crime was embraced by their design. Therefore, a situation can take place when persons, in common with other persons, taking part in committing an incomplete crime (attempt or preparation) will not undergo the penal responsibility together with other accomplices on the condition that the circumstances, which made the coming of the criminal result possible, were embraced as such by the conscience and will of a given participant of the crime. This is possible because the realizing the objective impossibility of the criminal result by one of the accomplices does not totally destroy the moment of the actual but not judicial complicity between him and other participants, of which we can say only conditionally, and exclude their responsibility. First, the act of committing a premeditated crime in complicity maintains the character of deliberate and joint. Second, the intention of other participants does not lose its direction to the criminal result. Third, the impossibility of bringing the crime to its end is not the intellectual-volitional moment of all participants without exception.
At first sight, such an order of things does not seem to be abnormal. But what, if we say about an active accomplice (organizer or even instigator)? For example, a citizen has organized the stealing his own car. The object of this crime for an actual executor is another's property, hence its absence for the feigned accomplice in that case means the absence of corpus delicti in the actions of the last person. Or else, a person takes into account the unfitness of the object of crime and means of its committing. For instance, he instigates somebody to kill a person already dead (a corpse), or passes off mere salt as deadly poison. Or else, a person realizes that he is not the subject of crime. For example, a soldier passes himself off as a deserter. In any of those cases, there's no corpus delicti and the persons given don't undergo the penal responsibility.
Is it expedient, from the point of view of the goals of the criminal law, formulated in the Article 2 of the Penal Code of Russian Federation, that the provocateur of crime shirks one's responsibility in the cases above-mentioned? At first sight, it seems that, to the objects of the crime, no detriment is inflicted, and this point is realized by the provocateur. Nonetheless, it follows that it's necessary to assert that the principle of economizing the normative material is not justified here, since it is in contradiction with the principle of economizing the repression measures. The fact that penal-punishing mechanism is brought to action once more, is not a common benefit. The sword of justice is double-edged, as we know, punishing the perpetrator, it causes damage to the society, too. The costs of administering the justice and maintenance of the penitentiary system are high. The problems of re-socialization count, too. In this case, the penal law becomes a mere pawn in making equal old scores. It is sure not to augment authority to justice. The point that the person, who have brought about a crime and been an active partaker of it, evades the penal responsibility, is not only abnormal but contradicts the sense and purpose of penal law.
The object of this socially dangerous act is the interests of society and the authority of justice. The objective side of it is an act of committing an incomplete crime, not led to an end due to the circumstances that depend on the will and conscience of a person given in this case, that necessarily brings about the socially-dangerous consequences consisting in applying the penal responsibility to other accomplices or inflicting a punishment on them. Subjective side is the realizing the possibility or inevitability of calling other accomplices to account in the penal sense of this word on condition of his own lawful evading penal responsibility, the prevision of those socially-dangerous results, the desire or intentional admission of them. The significance of the subjective side consists of the separation of socially dangerous acts from other cases of the attempt to commit a crime in complicity. The subject of this crime could be declared a person of the age of 16 years, inasmuch as a youngster of 14 or 15 years old is not able to realize the social danger of this act. A legislator should be guided just by these moments, if he decided to recognize this act as a crime. The dimensions of the sanction should be expediently put in a proportional dependence of the limits of the sanctions of the main crime, precisely because in the application of this sanction is expressed the detriment brought about to society. Since, the provocation of an attempt is more dangerous than that of a preparation, the legal norm, which would describe in its disposition the provocation of crime, ought to be correctly divided in two pieces correspondingly to the gravity of those acts. Since the necessary element of this act is its subject's shirking the responsibility, then in case if this element is absent, but the aim to expose other participants of the crime is present, this motive of committing a complete crime in complicity should expediently be contemplated as a circumstance aggravating the punishment, or else as a qualifying moment of the main act, that is the crime in complicity which the person given in this case undergoes a responsibility for, because the crime is brought to an end and there's no benevolent refusal to realize the design of the accomplices on the part of this person.
Thus, if the legislator decided to recognize this socially-dangerous act as a crime, the disposition of a corresponding norm of law would be as follows: "complicity in an incomplete crime (preparation or attempt) with the intention to expose other accomplices on condition of the provocateur’s own evasion of the penal law responsibility due to not completing the crime fully to its end because of the fact that the circumstances which prevented the criminal result were embraced by the conscience and will of this person". It's necessarily to note that this act can be expressed in contributing the crime to pass from the stage of the existence of design to the stage of preparation and further to the stage of attempt. In both cases of provocation, an organizer or instigator can act, an assisting accomplice can be only in the first case, an executor - only in the second case.
In other respects, the characteristics of this socially dangerous act are analogous to those of most crimes. An attempt, preparation, complicity and benevolent refusal to commit a crime can take place. All this speaks in favor of the declaration of this act as a crime by lawgiver.

* * *

It is not a secret that the sword of justice is double sharpened. So it is two-sided. It slits both ways. On the one hand we punish a perpetrator, on the other hand we cause harm to the society. This is true because we dispose of a citizen who could bring good to his family and country. Briefly speaking, we take a human being from the settled routine of his usual life through the mechanism of justice. So it might be taken as granted for that a judge or court and what is of most importance a lawmaker must consider not only the benefits of putting a man in prison but also the costs of punishment measures. When a man is in prison he is virtually lost for the society during a certain period of time because there is too little chance to realize your talent, genius, gift of enterprise. That is why we have to calculate the costs and benefits of putting a punishment on a member of our commonwealth. If we declare a man as infringing a penal law, we have to acknowledge that it is necessary to commit a new evil, defending the interests of justice. There is no doubt that the material costs of retribution are considerable. Therefore we are to prevent the machine of justice from administering new fines, terms etc. So, if somebody engender a crime he must be punished, too. Otherwise, we cannot minimize the costs of justice. The whole legal mechanism has for its purpose to reduce the number of the infringements of law. The least is the quantity of crimes committed the better.
But there may arise a breach in the strictly built system of the criminal law. For instance, there are three people. Let us consider the situation when two men (Paul and Jack) conspire to dispose themselves of another man (Peter). Their reason to cause harm to the third man is the desire to make profit by putting him in jail. They want to get his business, money and property. Or else, to revenge him for something, make him lose his good name and reputation. The scheme is simple. Paul insults Peter to make him angry. Then Jack instigates Peter to have revenge on Paul. To kill him with a rifle that cannot fire technically. Because the cartridge holder is empty or the cartridge primer is put out, or the ignition mechanism is broken, or else the discharging system does not work in a proper way, or otherwise there could happen no shot at all. Peter pulls the trigger in his vain attempt to dispatch Paul to the better world and there comes out nothing harmful to his prospective victim. No material evil result ensues but Peter did not know that aforethought. So a crime on the part of Peter exists. Though it is not completely accomplished. But what is the situation with Paul and Jack? According to the criminal law, they are absolutely innocent. That is because both Jack and Paul did not expect any misdeed that is prohibited by the penal law at all, as they knew both from the very beginning that the rifle might not fire.
That is possible due to the fact that the accessory theory of the partnership in a crime lost ground and gave way to more modernized ones of which the conception of the subjective participation of accomplices is the most widespread. The core of this theory is the point that we can say about illegal common for some people behavior only when there is the same will and intellect impulse to commit a crime. If a person does not take into account that he communicates with thieves or killers he cannot be declared as guilty because the most important aspect of accomplice’s partaking is common willful and intellectual moment which is aimed to make evil, but in this case it is absent. If a man conceive that he does not really aid the violators he can’t be put in jail.
Now, it is the time to denote the fact that what has been said above may be true not only for a passive assistant of a crime but also for an active partaker who begets this misdeed forbidden by criminal law.
So, we can say that some people can use the power of the judiciary system for the accomplishment of their evil wishes. They can abuse the law. So, the court can become a means of making equal old scores. In that case, the sword of justice cuts down on the quick not for the sake of the society but for the partial interests of some people, which are contrary to the interest of society. These interests come in conflict in a certain way.
But, it will be better if we come back to Paul, Jack and Peter. The end of the first two is to turn queen’s evidence and pass the last one to justice. We won’t come into close concern with process aspect of the criminal law but will consider the material side of this case. But, there’s no doubt that Paul and Jack could apply to a court as witnesses directly and provide themselves with other kinds of evidence.
We must also note that though Paul and Jack don’t lynch Peter, but they put the right of judging onto themselves. That is, they count all the same as being a law onto themselves. Actually, they take the law into their own hands. Paul and Jack provoke Peter to attempt assassinating one of them in vain. Maybe, Peter would never commit something like that all by himself. He is a law-abiding and satisfying citizen, who always pays his tax bills on time and have never conducted himself badly. But we shall agree that each man’s soul has some strings which can when touched wake up his ego and when it is awake the inhibiting mechanism of the consciousness fails to keep down emotions. It’s necessary to underline that this crime is the product of Paul and Jack’s evil will. Therefore such a behavior as Paul and Jack have had must be recognized dangerous for the society. Peter is taken off of his family into the prison. There’s not much of good in it. More precisely, there is some, still it only recovers the damage caused to the society as a whole through virtually tearing a member of the society from it. There’s no question whether to prohibit such a behavior of Paul and Jack or to look at it through one’s fingers.
The disposition of a presumed norm of law which could block up such abnormal conduct would be something like this: using the justice system in partial interests which consists in provoking a person to commit a crime when the provocateur avoids criminal law responsibility and retribution because of the absence of the intent to complete this crime with the aim to dispose of an adversary. In this norm, the objective side is no more important than the subjective side and you will understand why. We must distinguish such behavior from absolutely legal and justifiable operations of police on, for example, the drug market or in the rings where weapons are sold without government’s permission. Those operations are organized to take the gangsters by surprise flat-footed and red-handed, that is with valuables got by fraudulent and other illegal means and crime instruments which will then serve as evidence. Nobody would doubt if such activity of police were good for the society. That’s true because the police practically always have the information on drug and weapon dealers and the only one thing that lacks is the evidence. In these cases, there’re seldom people who would consent to be witnesses.
So, it is necessary to analyze whether the motive is to put in prison a gangster who always sells drugs and weapons, or it is to distract a good citizen off his well-planned style of life.
This problem can hardly be proclaimed as abstract. According to the scheme above-mentioned many people get in prison and their cases have not gone to statistics only because they are not considered as crimes.
It is very easy to resolve this problem in the USA due to the fact that there’s no necessity to pass a bill through the congress, to sign it by the president, to incorporate an adopted law in the code of criminal law. It would be sufficient just to make a precedent in any court and then to get the agreement of the Supreme Court of the USA.
Such an obvious contravention between the intendment of law and the reality, a dark figure phenomenon as to what position the sound judicial discretion ought to take is all the same a result of (we can still say this) the natural and logical legal grounds. The causal connection with the very structure of the penal law is open to contemplate.
The provocateur has a possibility to circumvent the law due to the point that the vice in the mental element of crime, which is the absence of the intent to commit the crime as perfect one, destroys corpus delicti as a system. And we can only say about the absence of crime in the act. Still, the common activity of the attempting subject and the provocateur is in some way concerted. The direct motive in the soul of the attempting subject is created by the instigating provocateur. On the part of the first the felonious attempt exists and there’s no absolvitor, though his crime is not actually committed, but an attempt is in itself a crime. They can see the cause and effect relationship between the committed but not completed crime of the attempting subject and the aiding in hand and abetting on the part of provocateur. The last one initiates the causation of crime but the justifying moment is that this inchoating is reflected and refracted through the consciousness of the first one and namely the attempting subject is eventually he who finally decides.
If we consider an analogous civil case there will be no doubt as to recognizing the attempting subject and the provocateur as joint tort feasors that must be jointly and severally responsible. Then there will be no lawful excuse or other justifying moment on the part of the last one. But there’s no punishable criminal participation as regards the provocateur. From the point of view of the penal law, the misdeed of the provocateur is as it were a quasi-tort, though all the crime committed is in some extent premeditated by him. As for provocateur, he devolves all the way of the commission of crime along with the attempting subject. Still, he is a feigned accomplice. Though he is the author of the cruel design, in legal contemplation he is absolutely innocent as well as free and clear.
But what is the situation with the attempting subject? We may ascertain he is under strict liability of criminal law. The contributory quasi-guilt of one of the provocateurs may only assuage the measure of punishment. The fact that the attempting subject may not be a habitual and hardened criminal, has a clean record and no evident criminal propensities or twist, has the same effect. There may be other moments alleviating punishment but not excluding responsibility. It may be true in a way that such excesses are out of the established modes of conduct of the attempting subject and the exciting passion created by provocateur is the main moment. The whole crime is due to passion and not the result of the vicious conduct of life. The very commission of crime can be made in hot blood, in heat of passion. Some degrading treatment derogating the dignity of the attempting subject, even not expressed in harsh language, can come in an open contradiction with his code of honor and only making satisfaction may be a suitable correction. Still, we have to repeat it, this is not a circumstance excluding responsibility and all our reasoning has weight only with deciding on the dimensions of the measure of punishment. All the same, the attempting subject must be found guilty because the fact that the crime instrument is not capable to cause harm is for him one of the imponderables, reasons beyond control.
Is such condoning the provocateur a justifiable thing? Of course, for an average citizen who conducts himself by the common sense such a state of things in the criminal law is nothing but a legal equivoke of an immoral character. For John Q. Public such cluster of behavior cannot be in accord with the policy of law. Yes, he may agree at a condition of appropriate explanation that this is the due process of law, but he won’t admit that this is the due course of law in the wide sense of that word. Almost every man in the street would consent with the idea that provocation of crime exists with detriment to the interests of society because there’s too much obvious private wrong and too little public convenience. To mention the increase of prison population would be enough. For certain, the punishment of the attempting subject according to the law is a case of just deserts, but people will not agree that the acquittal of the provocateur strictly according to the criminal law is not beyond the legal line. This ought to be understood as a mistake of law. And as a matter of law, not fact, this must be corrected by the lawgiver. The point that the provocateur is a legal person of law to initiate social vengeance is contrary to the nature of justice. The situation when such an act is warranted by law is a display of absurdity. This state of things is in the formal consent with the common law but not the equity law. The fact that provocateur has not the intent to commit a complete common crime alters the event of crime but not the essence of it. All such activity ought to be regarded as extralegal if not connected with the exposure of a drug dealer or Mafia man. There could be no compromise between the society and the provocateur because the matter doesn’t admit the give and take principle. Such an initiative of the provocateur to commit the attempting subject, who only yesterday was an average man, to justice cannot be approved of. Or else, the justice could become a gibbet law in a kangaroo court. Breaking off or suspending relations of the attempting subject and his family and colleagues only because the provocateur consider him as theoretically and then practically inclined to commit a crime can’t be admitted by the authority and the rule of law. The penal system cannot be used just as a dishonest means to have revenge on anybody. We cannot confine a person just because it is according to the caprice of the provocateur. We are to insist that this is a deviant conduct that must be declared as crime behavior. Each error in law is to be corrected sooner or later. There’s no reasonable cause why we are to comply with such iniquity. None might really reimburse the cost of the rehabilitation of delinquents especially a prospective repeater. Such a spontaneous, from the point of view of society as a system, retaliatory action should not be founded in law. In other words, it is inconsonant with the nature of justice. These usurped rights of society to decide on retribution must be taken back from the hands of the provocateur and protected against the possible abuse in the future. This model of abusing justice and the needs and wants of commonwealth are at variance, so it can’t be contemplated as an amicable action. No excuse of this wrong could hold reasonable. Such an activity subverts the believe of people in the legitimate cause of combating crime. This problem is not only a moot point of law but also of morality. Condoning the provocateur leads to recidivism and increase in the recorded crime, which are recognized as a public evil. In a conclusive word, we can say that such vindictive action of the provocateur implies only further spread of crime and nothing more. We have no moral right to leave the situation as is.

* * *

The provocation of crime may be observed in joyriding, swindling, sexual offences, white-collar crime and even bribe. Although such a proposition of law as the provocation of bribery exists, it has nothing to do with a legal phenomenon dealt with herein. The criminal law prohibits the attempts to fake facts in the case, to produce the fabricated evidence of a bribe, to expose falsely somebody. The penal law forbids fraud in act and fact but not in law. So, if an official takes money of his own free will, the provocateur is not guilty in the strict sense of the penal law, for he does not want that the money got in the disposition of the official. The case of rape is also of interest. To awake the sexual passion for a woman of good looks in the heart of a man is not a hard task. It is much harder sometimes to prove that the woman didn’t want a sexual intercourse, because the event that took place counters this opinion, it shows just the opposite. It is much easier to prove that the man must have taken into account that the woman might not want to. But if a woman wants to get raped just to put the violator into the jail, it is not a completed rape. It is an attempt, because the object of crime is not valid.
Therefore, if the course of law is not constructed properly, it must be corrected by the due course of justice. Such a gap in law must be displaced. This form of statute has to be transformed according to the spirit of right. What have we to expect to be done in the silence of law? To punish the provocation of crime is according to the natural law but unfortunately not the good or prevailing law because the old practice is forgotten, and, in conditions of removed legal restrictions, the provocateur is put at large. There must be made certain changes in the substantive law because the fact that the provocateur procures to ensure the protection of evidence is not essential from the point of view of a judge that has already defined the circumstances of the case. This lack of legislation can quite be surmounted by the judicial power. If there is no special written law, the judge made or case law might be of place. So, it is necessary that this problem of an error not in accidentia but essentia be resolved in the judiciary legislation of Anglo-Saxon system of the penal law and then transferred to the penal codes of the continental law through the comparative jurisprudence. A judge ought to lay down the law that such behaviors be unlawful. He must find for the provocation of crime to be an illegal act, and bind over the provocateur to abstain from such an activity under the fear of criminal penalty. Such a decision would be made without prejudice and be positive. Then the question at issue would be resolved finally. That is possible because the precept of such a law comes within the jurisdiction and the purview of justice, would it be a court or judge. If the provocation of crime were provided against, that would bear on the whole criminal situation in the society.

* * *

The maximum responsibility for the provocateur may be achieved, if a criminal result is attained in spite of the plans of the provocateur. This is possible in case if he was able and should to foresee that he might not cope with the task of warding off the criminal result.
The guilt is a psychological attitude of a person in the form of design or carelessness in regard to an act committed by him and its consequences, stipulated by the penal law, which his negative attitude toward the interests of the individual and society is expressed by.
The will is the practical side of the conscience, which consists in the regulation of the practical activity of a man. The volitional regulation of the behavior is a conscious direction of the mental and physical efforts of the achievement of a goal or the restraining from an activity.
The Penal Code of Russian Federation characterizes a design as a psychological attitude in which a person realizes the social danger of the actions (inaction), foresaw the possibility or inevitability of the coming of the socially dangerous consequences and wanted them or admitted consciously these consequences.
When we say about an intention, the prevision of the consequences may have the character of the prevision of a real possibility of their coming. So, if a person foresaw no criminal results, that is he is sure that their coming is impossible, we cannot say about an intentional crime. But, if the criminal result is achieved by the person provoked to commit a crime, we say about a levity on the part of the provocateur, because the provocateur reckoned to prevent those criminal results. That motive is essential for the provocation. If a person (the provocateur) admitted the possibility of the coming of the socially dangerous consequences or their inevitability and wanted them or was disposed toward them indifferently, we must about an ordinary crime committed in complicity and not of a provocation of crime.
The main line of the provocateur’s conduct is the complex of volitional and intellectual moment consisting in not admitting of the coming of the criminal results in the material and not legal sense. The provocateur understands that no criminal result will come out of the realization of his scheme. He makes everything to ward off any harmful results, because he wants to expose the executor and not himself. So, his plans do never include a possible or inevitable criminal result. That’s why, if a criminal result arose, we would say about a carelessness in the form of a levity, and there would be no complicity, because complicity is only possible when there’s a common design of the executor and the organizer, and not a combination of the design of the executor and the levity of the provocateur. Then we can say about negligence on the part of the provocateur, if he did not foresee the criminal results, but should have foreseen.
Nonetheless, we must discuss the provocation of crime in the narrow sense of it. That is the provocation of crime is an independent legal phenomenon. The defining indication of it is the absence of guilt and responsibility before the law on the part of the provocateur.
When a person who had provoked a crime, is declared guilty (no matter is it a design or carelessness), we say about a complete crime. The provocation may exist only if the provocateur evades the penal law responsibility.
The volitional content of the design in the active legislation is defined as a desire, conscious admission of the consequences of the crime or an indifferent attitude toward them. The provocateur does not want the criminal results, because his goal is to expose his adversary and not himself. He does not moreover admit them, and the more so, that he is not disposed toward them indifferently. He makes at the contrary everything that depends on him that there won’t arise any material criminal results.
What is more, we cannot say about guilt in the form of carelessness, because the provocateur makes everything to prevent any criminal results. So, there’s no guilt in the form of carelessness on the part of the provocateur. That is so, because, as a common rule, the responsibility of the penal character is possible without a material criminal result only in case of an attempt or preparation of crime. An incomplete crime may be committed only with an intentional guilt. Moreover, no formal “truncated” corpus delicti admits a carelessness guilt, because every corpus delicti of this kind contain the necessary element of an aim of the actions which a person is declared responsible for. Just this aim characterizes the actions as criminal and makes up for the absence of criminal results as qualifying moments. Thus, if there is an aim, there ought to be, and really is, an intention to achieve this aim. Besides, it is not to be doubted that in case of the commitment of a crime of which the obligatory indication is not the consequences (formal crime), the volitional element of the design is determined by the volitional attitude towards the illegal acts themselves. The intentional guilt of the provocateur might be only if he reckoned that the socially dangerous consequences are the natural result of the development of the cause-effect relationship exactly in this given concrete case. If a person, realizing the regularity of the coming of the consequences in many other similar situations, does not enlarge its scope to cover this given concrete case, then we could say about the prevision of the consequences only as an abstract possibility, that is, abstract from this given concrete case. For all this, it’s necessary to ascertain that a person had foreseen the criminal consequences and reckoned to prevent them.
A provocation of crime has always as its mandatory indication the defined design. That is the provocateur wants that the attempting subject gets possessed by a certain narrowly defined intention. His scheme does not admit an alternative or undefined design. (I mean an ideal provocation of a pure character that has an essence of its own not mixed with other penal phenomena and separated from them.) More precisely, there could be some alternative or indefiniteness but it is in the framework of his scheme. That is the executor makes nothing that leaves the original design of the provocateur, or else to be more exact, the very design of the provocateur does not include a variant that develops into a real material detriment to anybody. In this situation, if the attempting subject commits something that causes a material harm to anybody, that is an excess of the executor. So, the provocateur is not responsible again. What is an actual error for the attempting subject, is a matter of course for the provocateur. For the attempting subject, the error of fact is a wrong notion, misconception of a person in respect to the actual circumstances of the act committed and its objective indications. In the penal law, there’s singled out the following errors of fact: in regard of objective, object, cause-effect relationship, means, circumstances aggravating the responsibility.
The error in regard of the objective of crime does not change the form of the guilt, it only determines its content. This error may be expressed in a wrong notion of an objective that a person attempts on. For example, a person deems that he infringes upon the life of a policeman, when he really causes the death to another citizen. The responsibility in those cases is determined in accordance with the direction of the intention and the act committed must be qualified as an attempt to commit a crime, since actually the harm is not caused to the objective which the guilty person wanted to make an attempt on. But this is not a case of the provocation of crime, because if there were an instigator he would follow the fate of the executor. That is, the main indication of the provocation of crime – the evasion of the penal responsibility by the provocateur – is absent. A regular provocation of crime in case of the error of fact in the objective on the part of the attempting subject may, for instance, take place when a person instigated by the provocateur tries in vain to bribe a person whom he deems to be a State officer, but who in reality, is an ordinary person and the provocateur knows about it.
The error in regard of the object of crime is a delusion of a person in relation to the characteristics of the objects in the framework of the social relations, which this person attempts on. To this sort of the errors of fact in the object, the attempt on an absent object or delusion in regard of the qualities of the object is attributed. (Sometimes, this sort of the errors is called invalid object.) In these cases, the consequences, that were embraced by the conscience of the guilty person, don’t come, that’s why the act committed ought to be qualified as an attempt to a crime. For instance, a person shoots a puppet instead of a human being, and that was planned by the provocateur.
The error of fact in the means of committing a crime takes place in cases when a person uses other, unplanned means (the thing with which or with the help of which an influence on the object of the attempt and its victim is executed.) If a person, by mistake, for instance, uses mere salt as a poison, deeming that a big dose of it is deadly, in this case a person must answer for an incomplete criminal activity (the attempt or preparation for a murder). The provocation would be when the attempting subject was provided with this invalid means of committing a crime by the provocateur.
The error of fact in the cause-effect relationship between the act and the consequences is as follows. However, that does not mean that the guilty person should realize all the details and peculiarities of the cause-effect relationship. For a person to be declared as acting consciously, it suffices to establish that he embraced by his conscience the general law-governed nature of the development of the cause-effect relationship, understood that the criminal consequences might be the result of his actions. The error of fact in the cause-effect relationship may be only in the case when a person imagined wrongfully the general law-governed nature of this relationship. For example, a person had turned on a gas oven to kill his victim, but his goal was not achieved because the provocateur himself turns the gas off.
A common rule for all kinds of the error of fact is the point that the responsibility should be determined in correspondence with the guilt, that is, to proceed from the circumstances that the guilty person realized or should have realized at the moment of committing the crime.
Of course, a criminal negligence must be considered separately from not guiltily causing harm (incident, occurrence) when a person does not realize the criminal character of his actions and, according to the circumstances of the case, could not realize or foresee the possibility of the coming of the criminal consequences and according to the circumstances of the case should not and might not preview them. The absence of the obligations and (or) possibilities to preview, by a person, the harmful consequences, is a circumstance that exclude the guilt of this person, therefore the person independently from the consequences that has come, may not be called to responsibility.
The same is true for the provocation of crime. The absence of the guilt on the part of the provocateur makes impossible his being called to the penal law responsibility.
We can say about the provocation of an intentional crime. Because even if a criminal carelessness in the form of levity takes place, there is no crime, should there be no criminal material result. Therefore there can be only the provocation of a premeditated crime. But not less important is the absence of a real material criminal result, because only in this case the provocateur can elude the penal responsibility. So, the provocation of crime can take place only in case of an attempt or preparation for a crime.
We can say about an attempt or preparation only in reference to a purposive criminal activity. Those stages are possible only in crimes committed with a direct intention. As to the criminal acts committed with an indirect intention, there the stages of the preparation and attempt are impossible. If a person does not want the coming of the socially dangerous consequences, he can not prepare nor attempt to commit them. In these cases, the socially dangerous consequences of the crime don't form the goal of his criminal activity.
It is interesting to analyze the case of the crimes of a formal corpus delicti, for example, a robbery. In the Russian penal law, the robbery is recognized to be a completed crime at the point of the beginning of the attack with an aim to misappropriate another's property with the use of the violence dangerous for the victim's life and health or with the threat of the use of such a violence. So, the provocation may take place only if there's an attempt or preparation to commit a robbery. In case of a preparation of the robbery, the situation is more or less clear. The same way with the attempt, if we remember the necessity of an error of fact. That's way a provocation may take place, if the robber attacks a puppet (a fantastic case) or (what's more real) use the means that could never bring about the criminal results (uses a deodorant instead of nervous paralytic gas and the victim attempted knows about this).
The "truncated" corpus delicti is an interesting legal phenomenon in regard of the provocation of crime, too. In some corpora delicti, the moment of the completing of the crime is carried over to more recent, in relation to the coming of the criminal consequences, stages. For example, from the encroachment upon the life of the victim, the crimes stipulated in the articles 277,295,317 of the Penal Code of Russian Federation are considered to be complete crimes. Several corpora delicti constructed proceeding from the peculiarities of their commitment and the increased degree of their social danger so that the criminal act is recognized to be completed from the moment of the realization of the organizing activity directed to the commitment of the grave and particularly grave crimes. The corpora delicti provided for in the articles 208,209,210,239 of the Penal Code of Russian Federation.
The stages are possible practically in all intentional crimes with a material corpus delicti. So, the provocation of crime is possible in those cases, too.
The preparation and attempt are impossible when the law links the penal responsibility only with the coming of certain consequences, denoted in a disposition of the Special Part of the Penal Code of Russian Federation. Those are, for instance, the corpora delicti, provided for in the articles 285,286,288,330 of the Penal Code of Russian Federation.
The preliminary stages are not possible in the crimes of which the objective side consists in the creation of the danger of causing harm, either (the paragraph 1 of the article 215, the paragraph 1 of the article 217 and so on). The provocation, and accordingly an attempt, are impossible in the corpora delicti, where the preparatory activity itself is considered, by the lawgiver, to be a complete crime (the articles 208,209,210,239 of the Penal Code of Russian Federation). The stages of the attempt can't exist in the crimes with a so-called "truncated" corpus delicti (the articles 277,295,317), in the same time, as the stage of the preparation is quite possible here.
As a rule, a preparation and attempt is excluded in the formal corpus delicti crimes committed by an action, and an attempt in formal corpi delicti executed by an action in which the very first act of the criminal activity presents by itself a complete crime (such is, for instance, the corpus delicti of the robbery - article 162). But, of course, any rule has its exclusions. These exclusions were mentioned above.
In the full sense of the word, the preparation for a crime is reckoned to be counted as any deliberate activities creating the conditions for the realization of a crime. Unlike the discovery of the intention (to commit a crime) that is not prosecuted in the criminal way, the preparation is characterized not only by a design to commit a crime, but also concrete acts creating the conditions to commit a crime. However, unlike the attempt, there is not an immediate infringement upon the relations protected by the penal law, yet.
About a preparation (and a possible provocation of crime) as a stage of the accomplishment of a premeditated crime, we can say only if there's a preparation to commit a concrete crime. Besides, the subject intends to bring subsequently his criminal design to its end (according to the scheme: the creation of the conditions plus the execution): he does not think to confine himself to the preparation. It is not possible to consider as a stage of the preparation the situation, when a person, "to be on the safe side", for example, acquires, manufactures or adjusts some things that could then be used as a means or weapon of a criminal act - such acts don't form the stage of the realization of a single crime. Though, in some cases, they can be considered as an independent crime (the articles 222,223,324,325,327 of the Penal Code of Russian Federation and so on).
Thus, in the plan considered, the preparation to commit a crime is not a preparation for the criminal activity in general, but to commit a concrete crime.
The preparatory activity is very diverse. From the objective side they are possible in the following forms. Looking for the means and weapons of the commitment of a crime. The role of the provocateur here may be expressed in giving unfit means and weapons. But, the magistral line of the provocateur’s behavior is to create an intention in the head of the attempting subject (the executor or another accomplice) to prepare a crime and then to expose him, before the attempting subject realizes that he was deceived by the provocateur, who did not really want to commit any crime in complicity with the attempting subject. Then, it may be the adjustment of the means and weapons of the commitment of a crime. A conspiracy to commit a crime and another intentional creation of the conditions to commit a crime. Each of these objective indications has an independent significance, but often it may be ascertained that there is the presence of the two and more above-mentioned indications in an act.
As a looking for, it is thought to be any mode, legal or illegal, of getting the means and instruments of a crime: a search, buying, barter, receiving for some time, stealing and so on (for instance, poison – for the commitment of a murder, means of transportation – for the conveyance of the property intended to stolen).
As a looking for, it is also considered to be a find and misappropriation of something for the same ends. A looking for is, at last, also a preparation for such a use of everyday amenities (automobile, kitchen knife and the rest), that are in the property of the subject.
It should be underlined that the acquirement nor stealing, nor misappropriation of different means and instruments, nor adjustment of everyday things ought not to be acknowledged as a preparation, if it is not proved that the design for their use in the concrete criminal ends arose before the indicated acts. That’s why the essence of the provocation of crime is to create such a design and instigate the attempting subject to prepare or, further on, to attempt to realize this design.
As a looking for the accomplices, it is understood the recruitment of the executors and assisting accomplices for a subsequent criminal act. The talk is about situations when a crime is not gone through with for some reasons and interrupted on the stage of working out the conditions for its committing. If the provocateur initiates the preparation for a crime and knows aforethought that the crime will not ever be committed, he makes it only for the sake of the exposure of the attempting or preparing executor or other accomplice not informed that the crime is never to be accomplished. According to the paragraph 5 of the article 34 of the Penal Code of Russian Federation, a person, that has not succeeded to persuade other people to commit a crime, because of the circumstances that are not of his control, is liable to the penal law responsibility for the preparation (so-called unsuccessful instigation). Thus, if a person is instigated to instigate another person that was not possible to be instigated from the very beginning because that last person is a provocateur in the conspiracy with the first instigator, this is a provocation, too, but for the case when the two parts are the provocateurs themselves and both get double-crossed.
As a conspiracy, it is understood the organization of the group in which take part not less than two people who have aforethought arranged a common committing a crime. Here, the same way, the crime is not brought to its end due to some reasons, being intermitted on the stage of working out the conditions for its committing. The thing committed, in such cases, is regarded as the preparation of a corresponding crime.
Here, we ought to find a common position as to the presence of two conspiracies. One against the law, second against the first conspirators, who want to break the law. The second conspirators are not responsible for the first conspiracy, though they are its active participants, because they don’t want to make anything prohibited by the penal law. They just imitate criminal activity to incite the first conspirators to commit a real crime. Maybe, the first conspirators would have never become outlaws, but for the interference of the second conspirators in their life.
From the point of view of the strict legal regulations, the second conspirators are not liable to the penal responsibility, because they have known from the very beginning that no real (formal or material) harm to the objects protected by the penal law would never be caused. Is such an activity of the second conspirators to be considered as law-abiding a priori, not taking in consideration if there’s any good that extra prisoners are in jail, or it is necessary to elaborate a legal mechanism to distinguish the cases when such an activity is harmful or useful, or else, it is not expedient from the point of view of the common sense to give to the private hand the privilege to decide whether a citizens deserves to be free and bring the good to the society as a whole or not? That’s the question. Because when a provocation of crime takes place the justice is only to suit the will of the provocateur. It seems that the present system of justice of the modern world is not provocation-proof, and it could be doubted that any system of the coercion must be self-protected against the abuse and misappropriation of its rights to punish a delinquent.
If somebody has the acknowledged possibility to create a delinquent and go scot-free after it. It is to get away with the murder, from my point of view. And I’ll explain you why further on.
From the subjective side the preparation is only characterized by a direct intention. The guilty subject realizes that he creates the conditions for the following committing of a crime, and wants to create them. Besides, he previews the possibility of the coming of the socially dangerous consequences of that act, which he tries to commit, and wants their coming. The role and goal of the provocateur is to create such a desire, making sure from the beginning that this desire will not be realized, just to protect his own person from the penal law responsibility, and not for the sake of making a benefit for the humanity.
The preparation for a crime as a stage of its committing takes place only in case of the interruption of the preparatory activity due to the circumstances not in the power of a person. The legislator specially underlines that the socially dangerous act, interrupted owing to the objective reasons, is not brought to its end. Since, the preparatory activities are distant in the time (sometimes considerably) of the end of the crime, their interruption due to the circumstances that did not depend on the will of the guilty person should be proved during the preliminary investigation or in the court (after all benevolent refusal excluding the penal responsibility is quite possible). Thus, the provocateur creates above-mentioned circumstances not dependent on the will of the person provoked just to secure his own immunity against the penal law. The provocateur also procures the evidence that there was no benevolent refusal to commit the crime provoked.
When an attempt takes places there’s an immediate encroachment of the subject on the social relations protected by the penal law, that is, they are put under a direct menace of the causing the harm desired by the guilty subject. The danger of the coming of the harmful consequences intended by him or the full completion of the illegal act planned by him become real. However, the crime stays incomplete due to the circumstances not dependent on this given person.
In other words, an attempt is an incomplete or not entailing the coming of the desired for the guilty person result of an action (inaction) of the immediate committing an intentional crime. During an attempt, the talk is about actions (inaction) that immediately execute the corpus delicti of a concrete crime, but its execution is not brought to its end (the criminal result stipulated in the corresponding article of the Special Part of the Penal Code of Russian Federation as an obligatory indication of the objective side of the corpus delicti, of which the objective indications don’t provide for the coming of the concrete criminal consequences). The goal of a provocateur is to instigate a person to try to commit a crime, and then to make such an obstacle on the way of the realization of the crime that would prevent the criminal consequences or the completion of criminal actions. The person provoked, should he be an executor, assisting accomplice, instigator, or even an organizer who has not known about this obstacle, is liable to the penal law responsibility. The provocateur himself knows that the result will not be achieved. So, he is not guilty and thus liable to the penal responsibility.
So, the penal law does not discern the case when the provocateur creates the crime and exposes the executor and the case when he refuses to complete a crime that he wanted to accomplish before. In the both cases, the provocateur and the repenting organizer or instigator are not liable to the penal responsibility. The law does not make any difference. The case for the assisting subject is even more condoning, he is not guilty, even though he is a provocateur, even if the executor completes the crime. If the executor makes something extra and not premeditated by other accomplices, the rest of the subjects in the complicity are not responsible in the penal sense. Of course, we must take into consideration that there’s no alternative design covering the excess of the executor (not an excess in this case), and that there’s no carelessness guilt (negligence or levity) as a psychological relation to the consequences of the excess (in this case no complicity, because the last may be only in the presence of the intentional guilt).
Under an attempt as an act, that is immediately directed on the commitment of a crime, it is due to understand the accomplishment of the acts (inaction), incoming to the objective side of a corpus delicti. These acts or inaction manifest themselves just in the execution of a criminal design. They are already directed straight upon the object protected by the penal law (the relations of property, the security of life and health, and the sexual freedom), put it in the immediate danger of causing the considerable harm. If they were led to their end, they’d cause to the object such a harm (for example, the attempting subject encroaching on the life shoot with a gun, but misses, stab a knife, but the knife gets broken, hurl the victim off a train on the full motion, but the victim stays safe). In such cases the guilty person committed the acts directed straight to the deprivation of the victim of his life, the last was exposed to the immediate danger, but the death has not come due to the miss, disrepair of the weapon, lucky coincidence of the circumstances not dependent on the intentions of the guilty. The provocateur creates the last circumstances just to prevent the coming of the material result of the crime he has invented just to protect his own person from the penal responsibility and expose the person provoked.
The unfinished character of the criminal attempt is another substantial indication of an attempt. The unfinished character distinguishes the attempt as an independent stage of the development of the criminal activity from a complete crime.
The unaccomplished nature may be characterized by the not-coming of the criminal result stipulated in the law, when the guilty has carried out all those acts, that he intended to commit (for instance, with the goal to cause the death, he has made several wounds to the vital organs of a victim, but the last was saved). In this case, the subjective completeness of the acts of the guilty person should be distinguished from actually not accomplishing the criminal act (the criminal result stipulated by the penal law is absent). The main goal of the provocateur is to create this subjective completeness and to prevent the actual accomplishment of the criminal intent.
The other indication characterizing the attempt from the objective side is that the crime is not led to its end due to the circumstances not dependent on the will and reason of the provocateur. The legislator specially underlines that the criminal act in this case is not led to its end not because of the benevolent refusal (as it is the case with the provocateur, from the formal point of view of the law), but due to the objective, that is, not dependent on the guilty person reasons (but depending on the provocateur’s volitional and intellectual moment).
According to the legal definition of the attempt, the last is characterized not only by the absence of the criminal result desired by the guilty person, that is characteristic for the criminal acts with so-called material corpus delicti, but also by the point that the crime is not led to its end. So, the legislator underlines the possibility of an attempt in reference to the crimes not only of the material but also formal corpus delicti. Thus, the provocation is possible in the formal corpus delicti.
The attempt the same as the provocation of crime can take place only in the presence of the direct intent to commit a crime.
They also distinguish the fit and unfit attempt. The last, in its turn, is subdivided into the attempt to an unfit object and the attempt with unfit means.
During an attempt on the unfit object, the acts of the guilty don’t create a real danger of causing the harm to the social relations protected by the penal law due to the actual error on his part (for example, the shot into a dead body, the breaking open a safe which is empty, the transfer of a bribe to a feigned intermediate). The role of a provocateur consists in creating such errors in the conscience of the attempting subject artificially, that is, a provocateur make the object of the crime invalid himself to prevent a complete crime. The real aim of the provocateur is the fate of the person provoked and not the interests protected by the law. Though the provocateur creates the crime, he doesn’t mean to lead it to its end from the very beginning.
During an attempt with unfit means, the guilty uses for his socially dangerous goals such things that are not able to bring about the completion of the encroachment or the criminal results desired due to their objective qualities. Under the means here are understood not only just weapons and other means of a crime, but also its methods and way of committing. Unfit means are subdivided, in their turn, into absolutely unfit and unfit in the given conditions (for instance, the attempt to fire a gun that’s not loaded). If this gun was delivered to the provoked person by the provocateur, the last has known from the very beginning that this gun is not fit and could not fire, the first at the contrary did not know it, that’s why he will be put in jail and the other go scot-free.
The cause-effect relationship in case of complicity is expressed in the establishing of the circumstances. In the objective reality, the harmful consequences that have come were brought about by the common criminal activity of all of the accomplices. Though, when the complicity takes place, the acts, stipulated as concrete forms of crime, are committed immediately only by the executor, the acts of the other accomplices, creating the conditions for the accomplishment of a crime by the executor, bring about as a reason themselves the execution of the objective side of the crime. That’s why it must not be doubted that the organizer or instigator cause the crime, though it is not brought to its logical end.
The question of joint activity is resolved not only on the basis of the establishment of the objective moments, but also is dependent upon the establishment of the subjective moments in a great part (psychological community of accomplices). The content of the psychological connection (subjective moment of complicity) is characterized by the knowledge of each accomplice about the activity of the other persons and the aspiration to achieve the criminal consequences as a result of the common efforts.
During a provocation of crime, the above-mentioned conditions are observed, that is what makes it possible to say about complicity. But, we should not forget that, for the subjective side of complicity, it is characteristic the presence of not only a subjective connection between the accomplices, but also a relationship of the accomplices toward the act committed in common and its consequences. If the provocateur has not the guilt in any form, and in a complicity it is possible only with a direct intention, thus, as much as the provocateur does not really want the coming of the criminal result and knows that this coming of this result is not possible, he may not be called for an answer before the law.
I hope that now there’s no doubt on your part that the provocation of crime is an evil when it is used for the private interests without the sanction of the State authority. But even a crime may be committed for the benefit of the community if a necessary defense on the part of the State or a private citizen takes place. We won’t go into details, and will only say that the provocation of crime as a defense against a real threat may take place, but not very often. More probable may be the causing of harm to a person, who committed a crime, during the seizing and detention of a criminal. The extreme necessity as an argument against the penal law responsibilities, should the provocation of crime be declared as a crime itself, is even less probable.
The same could be said about other circumstances excluding the penal responsibility: the substantiated risk, the execution of an order and so on.
To sum up what was said above, we must say that it is a principle of the penal law that the penal responsibility is not possible without a guilt, because the absence of the guilt as a necessary element of the corpus delicti, destroys it and there’s no grounds for the penal responsibility.
Now let’s consider some concrete examples of the provocation of crime in relation to the forms of crimes stipulated by the Special Part of the Penal Code. Let’s consider, for instance, the case of the rape. When a rape takes place, the design of the violator embraces the sexual intercourse with a woman against her will and consent as a final goal, the same as the actions of achieving this goal with the appliance of the physical violence, threats or the use of the helplessness of the victim. This is maybe a unique case when the feigned victim may become the provocateur of the crime without complicity, that is, the presence of third persons. Thus, a woman wants to put a man in jail, she seduces him and in the point of climax feigns that she does not want the sexual intercourse. Of course, if she wants to use this act as a means of putting a man in jail, she cannot be raped by the definition, because this sexual act is made according to her will and consent, though she looks at it as a necessary evil, that’s why this crime cannot be considered as a complete one. Still, it is a crime, though an attempt, because the violator makes everything to complete a crime and, against his will and intellect, it is not completed, just due to the fact that his victim wants him to be in prison and is ready to suffer a detriment to attain this goal.
The rape as almost any crime may be committed in complicity, if the objective side of the crime is accomplished by a group of persons. This is the classical case of the provocation of crime. There can be here the feigned accomplices the same as the feigned victim. We only must say that the special moment of the provocation of crime in the framework of a rape is the necessary participation of the victim in the conspiracy against the person provoked to commit a rape.
Though the rape is recognized to be a complete crime from the beginning of the sexual intercourse, we must remember that even if this sexual intercourse is finished and led to its logical end, this is nevertheless an attempt, if the woman uses this act as a means of putting a man in jail and consents to be raped in a feigned way. It is necessary to underline the point that the woman should have a wish to put a man in jail before the rape and not after it, only thus there can be a provocation of crime.
When the question is about resolving the cases of attempts to a rape with the use of the physical and mental violence, it is due to establish if the culprit acted with the purpose to commit a sexual intercourse and whether the appliance of the violence was a means to achieve this goal. But we must not forget that we discuss the matters of the material and not process penal law.
Now, let’s consider the provocation of the bribery that has little common with the provocation of crime. In the legal sense, according to the article 304 of the Penal Code of Russian Federation, the provocation of a bribe or a commercial graft is an attempt to deliver to the official functionary or a person that executes the directing functions in a commercial or other organizations, without his consent, money securities, other property or the rendering of the services of the property character with the purpose to artificially create the evidence of the committing of a crime or to blackmail. The subject of the provocation of the bribe or commercial graft may be any person acting with a direct intent with the purpose to artificially create the evidence of committing the crime or to blackmail. This crime is complete from the moment of the attempt to deliver money or other material valuables or the attempt to render the services of material character. When resolving the question of the presence of the corpus delicti, the court is due to verify whether there was a preliminary consent of the official or the person executing the directing functions in commercial or other organizations to accept the bribe or commercial graft. When such a consent is absent or there’s a refusal to take the bribe, the person, that attempted to deliver the above-mentioned object of the bribe with the purpose to artificially create the evidence of the committing the crime or to blackmail, is liable to the penal law responsibility. It is not a provocation of bribe or commercial graft when there is the realization of an operations-investigating experiment provided for by the legislation in connection with the testing of a statement of an extortion of a bribe or a property remuneration in case of a commercial graft. From the subjective side this crime is committed with a direct intention, the culprit understands that the official functionary or a person that executes the directing functions in a commercial or other organization, does not know that he will be given money or other property or the services of property character will be rendered, and does not give the consent to this, however, in spite of this fact, he undertakes the attempt to deliver it personally or by an intermediate. The goal of the acts of the guilty is the artificial creation of the semblance of the presence of the evidence that this given official functionary or a person that executes the directing functions, had an intent to acquire illegally money, securities, other property, also to avail oneself of the services of the property character for the rendering some actions (inaction) in connection with the official position he occupies in the interests of the person that gave these valuables and rendered these services. The goal of the guilty in the provocation of a bribe or a commercial graft (in the sense of the article 304 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation, but not as an example of the provocation of crime) may be also the use of all this as a means of blackmailing against the persons above-mentioned.
It is easy to see that the provocation of the crime in case of a bribery has little common with the provocation of a bribe or a commercial graft in sense of the article 304 of the Russian Code of the Russian Federation Russian Code of the Russian Federation. First of all, the provocateur does not create the evidence of a crime artificially, he creates the crime itself, though incomplete. Secondly, he assures the consent of the official person to be given a bribe from the very beginning. Therefore the provocateur of crime in case of a bribe is not guilty in the sense of the article 304 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation. Then, it is necessary to take notice of the point that the provocateur of the crime does not falsify any evidence. He creates this evidence as a necessary element of the crime provoked, and he presents to the court the real circumstances of the case. Though the provocateur is a feigned accomplice or victim of a crime, he does not fake the evidence. Therefore he may not be declared guilty in the sense of the article 304 of the Penal Code of the Russian Federation.
Now, let’s consider the case of the murder in the framework of the provocation of crime. If a murder may be committed both with a direct and indirect intent, the attempt to a murder (and therefore a provocation of crime), at the contrary, may be only with a direct intent, that is when the thing committed testified that the guilty realizes the social danger of his actions (inaction), foreseen the possibility or inevitability of the coming of the death of another person and wanted its coming, but the deadly outcome did not happen due to the circumstances not dependent on him (owing to the interference of other people or otherwise). The role of the provocateur is to create such intent in the head of the person provoked and then create insurmountable obstacles on the way of the realization of this will.
The other interesting case of the provocation of crime is the illegal dealing in weapons and arms. If the guilty stole an arms that is not fit for the functional use (ammunition, exploding substance), under a misapprehension in regard of its qualities and believing that it is in working order, the thing committed should be qualified as an attempt to steal arms. The same thing is about the drug dealing. Now, it is the time to proceed to the proving of the point that something resembling the provocation of crime, but not it itself, is an instrument of the investigation activity. It may be expressed in the form of the operations introduction, controlled delivery and operations experiment (article 6 of the investigation activity law of Russian Federation). Should the provocation of crime be declared a crime itself, such an activity would not entail the penal law responsibility for the agent who took part in such an operations investigating activity, because it would be declared as a necessary defense, well-founded risk, capturing and detention of a criminal, extreme necessity and other circumstances excluding the penal law responsibility. That is so, considering that, according to the article to the article 8 of the investigation activity law of Russian Federation, the carrying out of an operations experiment is only admitted in the end of the revealing, prevention, putting a stop to and detection of a grave crime, and also with the purpose of the exposure and establishment of the persons that prepared and have committed these crimes. So, the investigating agents and detectives must not create a crime, but just to procure the evidence when the crime is already created, that is the crime is on the stage of preparation or attempt, the last stage may be extended in time when the attempting subject tries to find the accomplices for a future crime and the people he addressed have not decided yet as to what answer must be given, to become an accomplice or to benevolently refuse to commit a crime. If one day the provocation of crime is declared a crime itself, then, every person concerned should have the possibility to apply to a court to find out whether the crime he is proved guilty for, was provoked or not. Thus, a corresponding amendment in the penal law should be made and it must be left up to the court to decide whether the provocation of crime took place and the rights of the culprit were infringed on.

Penal Code of Russian Federation
Article 2. The goals of Penal Code of Russian Federation
Paragraph 1
The goals of this Code are the protection of the rights and freedom of man and citizen, property, public order, environment, constitutional order of Russian Federation against any criminal encroachment, the guarantee of piece and security of humanity, and also prevention of crime.
Article 5. The principle of guilt.
Paragraph 1
A person is liable to penal responsibility only for the socially dangerous acts (inaction) and socially dangerous consequences in relation of which his guilt is ascertained.
Paragraph 2
Objective imputing, that is the penal responsibility for the innocent causing harm, is illegal.
Article 8. The foundations of penal responsibility.
The foundation of penal responsibility is committing an act that consists of all indications of the corpus delicti stipulated by this Code.
Article 24. Forms of guilt.
Paragraph 1
A person can be declared guilty in a crime if he committed an act intentionally or neglect.
Article 14. The definition of crime.
A crime is recognized to be a guilty committed socially dangerous act prohibited by this Code under the menace of punishment.
Article 25. Crime committed intentionally.
Paragraph 1
A crime committed intentionally is recognized to be an act committed with direct or indirect intention.
Paragraph 2
A crime is recognized to be committed with an direct intention if a person have realized the social danger of his acts (inaction), foreseen the possibility or inevitability of the coming of socially dangerous consequences and wanted them.
Paragraph 3
A crime is recognized to be committed with an indirect intention if a person have realized the social danger of his acts (inaction), foreseen the possibility 0f coming of socially dangerous consequences, didn't want them, but consciously admitted those consequences or was disposed to them with indifference.
Article 26. Non-intentional forms of guilt.
Paragraph 1.
A crime committed by carelessness is recognized to be an act committed by levity or negligence.
Paragraph 2.
A crime is recognized to be committed by levity, if a person has foreseen the possibility of the coming the socially-dangerous consequences his actions (inaction), but without sufficient grounds for that, presumptuously reckoned to prevent those consequences.
Paragraph 3.
A crime is recognized to be committed by negligence, if a person did not foresee the possibility of the coming of socially-dangerous consequences of his actions (inaction), though with a necessary attentiveness and foresight should or might have foreseen those consequences.
Article 28. Innocent causing harm.
Paragraph 1
An act is recognized to be committed innocently if a person who committed it, did not realize and according to the circumstances of the case might not realize the social danger of his actions (inactions) or did not foresee the possibility of the coming of the socially dangerous consequences and according to the circumstances of the case should not or might not to foresee them.
Article 29. Complete and incomplete crime.
Paragraph 1
A crime is recognized to be complete, if the act committed by a person, consists of all the indications of the corpus delicti provided for by this Code.
Paragraph 2
An incomplete crime is recognized to be the preparation for a crime and the attempt to a crime.
Article 30. Preparation for crime and attempt to crime.
Paragraph 1
The preparation for a crime is recognized to be looking for, manufacture or adjusting, by a person, the means or instruments of committing a crime, looking for accomplices of a crime,
a conspiracy to commit a crime or otherwise an deliberate creation of the conditions to commit a crime, if, for all this, the crime was not completed due to the circumstances not depending on this person.
Paragraph 3
The attempt to a crime is recognized to be deliberate actions (inactions) of a person, that were immediately directed to commit a crime, if, for all this, the crime was not completed due to the circumstances not depending on this person.
Article 31. Voluntary refusal from a crime.
Paragraph 4.
An organizer or instigator for a crime is not liable to the penal responsibility, if these persons prevented the bringing the crime to its end by the executor through their timely announcement to the authorities.
An assisting accomplice is not liable to the penal responsibility, if he has undertaken all measures dependent on him to prevent the committing of the crime.

Article 32. The definition of complicity in a crime.
The complicity in a crime is recognized to be an intentional common participation of two or more persons in committing a premeditated crime.
Article 33. The forms of complicity in a crime.
Paragraph 1
The accomplices in a crime together with executor are recognized to be organizer, instigator, assisting accomplices.
Paragraph 2
An executor is recognized to be a person who immediately committed a crime or immediately participated in its committing together with other persons (co-executors), or else committed a crime with the aid of persons who are not liable to penal responsibility due to their age, irresponsibility or other circumstances stipulated by this Code.
Paragraph 3
An organizer is recognized to be a person who organized committing a crime or directed its execution, and also a person who created an organized group or criminal association (criminal organization) or directed them.
Paragraph 4
The instigator is recognized to be a person who induced the other person to commit a crime, by means of persuasions, graft, threats or otherwise.
Paragraph 5
The assisting accomplice is recognized to be a person who contributed committing a crime by advices, instructions, giving information, means or instruments of committing a crime, or removal of obstacles, and also a beforehand promise to conceal a criminal, means and instruments of committing a crime, signs of a crime or things gained in a criminal way, and also a person who promised in advance to acquire or sell such things.
Article 34.
Paragraph 5.
In case of not completing the crime by an executor due to the circumstances not dependent on him, other accomplices undergo the responsibility for the preparation of an attempt to a crime, for the preparation of crimes.
A person that has not succeeded to persuade other people to commit a crime due to the circumstances not dependent on him is liable to the penal responsibility for the preparation of crime.
Article 36. The excess of executor.
The excess of executor is recognized to be committing, by executor, a crime that was not embraced by the design of other accomplices.
For the excess of executor, other accomplices are not liable to penal responsibility.

Article 105. Murder.
The murder is the intentional causing of the death to another human being.
Article 162. Robbery.
The robbery is an assault with the purpose to misappropriate another's property, committed with the use of the violence dangerous for the life and health or with a threat of such a violence.
Article 209. Gangsterism.
The creation of a steady armed group (gang) with the purpose to assault citizens and organizations, and equally the leadership of such a formation.

Article 215. The infringement of the rules of security on the objects of atomic energetics.
Paragraph 1.
The infringement of the regulations of the security of the allocation, designing, building and exploitation of the objects of atomic energetics, if it might entail the death of a human being and the radio-active contamination of the environment...
Article 223. The illegal manufacturing of weapons.
The illegal manufacturing or repair of firearms, completing parts for them, and equally the illegal manufacturing of the ammunition, explosive substance or explosive devices.
Article 277. An attempt on the life of a State or public figure.
An encroachment upon the life of a State or public figure, committed with the purpose to stop his State or public activity or a revenge for such an activity (terrorist act).
Article 330. Arbitrariness.
The arbitrariness is a high-handed, in defiance of the order established by the law and other normative legal acts, perpetration of some actions of which the legitimateness is contested by a citizen or organization, if those actions caused a material harm.

Essay

When I studied the civil law for the first time, I had encountered an interesting legal phenomenon. It consisted in the contention between different rules inside the institute of the unfounded enrichment. This paradoxical point entailed into the argument the rules from other institutes of civil law. First, I had thought it to be a purely theoretical problem but then T met a very same situation in the real world of my juridical practice. The case was considered in the court. And, as I see it the court decided according to its notion of right and wrong, not through the true interpretation of the law involved.
The case was as follows. It brought to the scene four legal persons. The territorial department of Russian railroads, a firm specializing in the construction of and repair of railways, a municipal office dealing in agricultural products and a large scale slaughter house.
I want to say at the very beginning of the argument that the case is to show the actuality of the problem, to act as an example of this legal phenomenon and as a basis for the inductive conclusions. The conclusions made during this research will have a general effect not confined to this special case.
The scheme worked this way. The monopoly of Russian railroads had not enough money to pay its creditors including the construction of infrastructure. So the railroads offered the firm a special kind of payment. The railroads acted as a quasi–bank. The money that the construction firm had on this account could be spent only on the services of the railroads itself, that is transportation. But this money could be transferred to the quasi–account of somebody else. So, it was arranged that the money on the quasi–account will be passed on to the municipality which collected the meat from collective farms, promising to sell it at a good price. The municipality actually could sell meat at a premium to a slaughter house up North. But, it had no money to transport its goods there. So, the construction firm conceded its money on the quasi–account to the municipality. Now, the municipality could transport the meat to the Northern slaughter house and sell it there. The slaughter house directly paid to the construction firm its share of the proceeds from the sale of meat proportional to the cost of transportation.
So, the construction firm received cash instead of its funny–money. At the end of this business it turned out that the municipality changed its officials and decided to close down the shop in meat dealing. There simply were not cattle to slay already. But the construction firm ordered the railroads to transfer 500000 rubles off its quasi–account to the quasi–account of the municipality just before the end of the first part of the story. Then, he decided to ask his money given up. But, it did not want to bring to the scene the four–party contract, because the construction firm overdrew from the slaughter house quite a sum that should have been used for the clearing of debts in such a case. So, the construction firm and the former official of the municipality who managed the relevant department faked two documents: an offer on the part of the construction firm to buy meat from the municipality directly for the money on the quasi–account and a back dated letter of the official testifying that the municipality owed 500000 rubles to the construction firm.
The construction firm brought an action in court and sued the municipality for a breach of contract. The court found that the contract was not concluded in that the offer did not define all the essential moments of contract, moreover it was not accepted. But the court decided for the action to be satisfied because of the presence of unfounded enrichment on the part of the municipality who had spent the money from the quasi–account to the time the suit was considered in the court.
The above–considered case is a special one of a more wide situation when a person presents money or property to another person without a contract or a provision in law.
Further on, I will consider that special case, but make conclusions on a general basis
According to Art. 1109 of Civil Code of Russian Federation, sums of money and other property presented in course of the fulfillment of a not existing obligation, if the acquirer will prove that the person that requires the return of the property has known about the absence of any obligation. In the case considered, there was no concluded contract. The absence of any juridical two party deal between the plaintiff and defender, proves that the plaintiff as a person requiring the return of the property, knew about the absence of the obligation. Any unilateral intentions of the plaintiff do not have any effect in hat the civil law obligation exists only when it has the juridical force, that is the form of the deal was observed, which is not the case.
We should only add that a plaintiff can produce any kind of unilateral back–dated documents as evidence. The legal proceedings cannot prevent a party of a lawsuit against this abuse, because it’s technically impossible. So, the material law should interfere and stipulate that in some cases a party not observing the established procedure of office–work and conclusion of contract will lose not only the possibility to prove his rights but also the material right itself. It’s a legal stimulus for more clear dealing in economy. The State simply obliges businessmen to act up to a certain level of the documentation of their acts and intentions to provide enough evidence in case of a dispute. The court cannot lose face and declare that it have not enough evidence of the conditions of a deal knowing even doubting that there was a deal at all. Common sense and the rule of analogy is not always sufficient to find right. This stalemate is a natural consequence of the case when a person makes business and does not care to clear up the conditions of it on paper.
So, the only way for the court to avoid this situation when he should have declared his failure to administer justice is to prevent the person participating in civil law activity to run itself in that stalemate. So, the lawmaker has declared beforehand that a person loses its property because is guilty of not observing the established paper work way of making business.
So the actual relations not put in order should be declared as a not existing commitment in the sense of Art 1109 of Civil code of Russian Federation, that is “not-existing” in juridical sense. The preventive provision of the civil law is intended to make the involved parties to arrange their economic relations in a juridical way to make their business activity “clean and clear” for the State, which only in that case may define the legal aspects of the relationship between the participants of the economic circulation including the competence of their acts with law. The opinion that the Art 1109 of Civil code of Russian Federation means the affected and pretended deal is not true, because for these kinds of deals a different regime of property relationship between the parties involved is stipulated by law. So, in sense of Art 170 of Civil code of Russian Federation, the pretended deal is a juridical proper deal that has a legal potential to bring about certain effects. In our case, there is not a juridical correct form of deal, in which the economic essence of the parties’ relationship may exist.
In its nature, the pretended deal does not presume any virtual acts of its fulfillment, therefore we cannot say about property delivered through a pretended deal. If there is even a unilateral fulfillment, that is not a pretended deal.
The affected deal, in its turn, first, must be concluded in a juridical correct form, secondly, it however entails legal consequences of different kinds. The rules about the deal that was really intended by the parties, taking into account the essence of the deal, not the rule of unfounded enrichment.
Moreover, the pretended and affected deal should as any other invalid deal have presumed the restitution by the force of Art 167 of Civil code of Russian Federation, if there had been the reciprocal act of the parties to fulfill the deal. So, the affected and pretended deal has nothing in common with the property regime of the regulation of the relationship between the parties to proceed from the Art 1109 of Civil code of Russian Federation where one of the parties is bereft of the fulfilled. It is not well-founded, that Art 1109 of Civil code of Russian Federation relates to invalid deal committed with a purpose contrary to the foundations of legal order and morality, when all received through the deal comes to the income of Russian Federation due to the following grounds. First, Art 169 of Civil code of Russian Federation stipulates for the invalid deal, but not for a not-existing commitment. That is the commitment exists and its juridical form is observed, but its essence is contrary to the foundation of the legal order and morality. Besides, to proceed from the principle of saving of legal material, the lawmaker would not indicate the legal consequences of this juridical important act in the totally different chapter of the Civil code, while the fate of the received through the deal is already exhaustively defined before. Moreover, the fact that these two norms are placed in different chapters of Civil code and their quite different vocabulary i9ndicates that they ought to regulate two different cases. It should also be taken into account that in Art 169 of Civil code of Russian Federation is said about reciprocal fulfillment. And what’s more not always the received by the both parties of the deal comes to the proceeds of the State. When the intention is only present with one of the parties, the other party returns to itself the fulfilled, that is the common rule of Art 167 is in effect, not of Art 1109 of Civil code of Russian Federation.
To be more persuading, we should apply the analogy of law according to Art of Civil code of Russian Federation.
The opinion might be put under the doubt that there can be a case stipulated by law, when one of the parties will leave with it the delivered property as a penalty established by the State to the other party who did not reckon it necessary to confirm there intentions by a legal form which is proper for the State to evaluate. Let’s consider the provision of the other point of Art 1109 of Civil code of Russian Federation that the property cannot be returned as unfounded acquisition if the delivery was a fulfillment of obligation before the coming of the term of its fulfillment, if the obligation does not provide differently. It’s clear that this fulfillment does not come to the income of the State, and its recovery by obligation law is impossible because according to a common rule for the parties practicing business activity, this will not be considered as a proper fulfillment through Art 315 of Civil code of Russian Federation. Though, Art 1103 of Civil code of Russian Federation stipulates that as a common rule the provisions of the institute of unfounded enrichment can be applied to the claims of a party of an obligation to the other one in respect of the fulfilled in connection with this obligation. But a special norm of law has a priority over a common one. That article also stipulates that this rule can be applied to the return of the fulfilled through an invalid deal. As we know the not-observance of the juridical form of a deal can mean its being invalid. But the same way the special norm of Art 1109 has the upper hand over the rule of Art 1103 of Civil code of Russian Federation.
In case of the absence of this rule a chaos would arise in the relations regulated by civil law since the parties would not have the strict temporal orientations to adjust their activity. Consequently, it cannot be doubted that in this case, the same as in the case of a not-existing obligation, a party loses the property delivered as a sanction for breaking the order established.
We cannot consent with the arguments that the rule of Art 987 of Civil code of Russian Federation of unfounded acquisition and enrichment in consequence of the acts for another’s interests should be applied on account of the point that it is said there about a case when there are acts not directed immediately to the provision of the interests of another person, including a case when the person who committed them presumed to act in his own interests. In our case the plaintiff himself acknowledged that he intentionally transferred 500000 rubles on the quasi-account of the defendant. There was no mistake in the acts of the claimant as to whose interests he provided for.
The effect of Art 984 of Civil code of Russian Federation of the compensation of detriment of the person acting in another’s interests cannot take place in that the acts of the plaintiff are not in accordance with the conditions of Art 980 of Civil code of Russian Federation. In our case the conditions of the acts in another’s interests were not complied with. Namely, there was no obvious benefit or profit for the interested person beforehand. No actual or probable intentions of the person interested to use the received property existed. The claimant did not show a due care and wariness corresponding to the circumstances of the deal when he decided on the necessity and expedience of his acts.
The application of the rules of the contract of commission or other contract that would correspond to the character of the acts undertaken according to Art 982 of Civil code of Russian Federation cannot take place, because there is not even a verbal acceptance by the person interested, of the acts in his interests.
The essence of the dispute is that the defendant does not put under a doubt the conditions of the deal, instead he protests against the argument of the plaintiff that there was a deal at all in our case, in the first place.
That’s why the consequences of a lack of form of a deal, including the rule of restitution of Art 167 of Civil code of Russian Federation cannot be applied to our case. The act of the claimant to transfer the money on the quasi-account of the defendant was a unilateral one. It’s a unilateral deal. Its form was written one. So, the consequences of the lack of form of a deal cannot be applied to this isolated deal. So, there can be no restitution. On the other hand, there was no bilateral agreement between the claimant and the defendant that would have arranged the compensation for the transfer. So, there is no lack of form of agreement between the parties, there’s no agreement at all. The reference of the defendant to Art 162 of Civil code of Russian Federation for such a consequence of the lack of juridical form as the deprivation of the right for the claimant to resort to witness evidence, has simply a legal proceedings character, so it is based on a law material by its status.
We should consider the transfer of money by the claimant to the defendant simply as a deal in another’s interests according to Art 986. And this deal can imply only rights for the defendant and not duties, in that the defendant (the municipality) owes nothing to the railways. The deal in the interests of the defendant contents only unilateral obligation of the railways to transport goods at the cost of 500000 rubles.
In definition of the relationship between the defendant and claimant we should acknowledge that the point 3 of Art 159 of Civil code of Russian Federation as an exception of the necessity of a written form of deal cannot be applied because this deal was not committed in exercising of the four-party relationship arranged by a system of written agreement between the construction firm, municipality, slaughter house and railways. What is more, their was not an agreement between the parties for such a way of exercising the above-mentioned contracts. If there is a commitment in our case, it could only be a unilateral one in which according to Art 307 of Civil code of Russian Federation the claimant (debtor) should exercise certain act to the benefit of the defendant (creditor), precisely to deliver the money by means of a quasi-account, and the defendant (creditor) has a right to require the fulfillment of the obligation by the claimant. Such a inference ensues from the analysis of the facts in connection with Art 153,154,155,162 of Civil code of Russian Federation.
The agreement of the claimant (constructing firm) with the railways as to the transportation of goods for the defendant (municipality) at the cost of 500000 rubles is according to Art 430 of Civil code of Russian Federation a contract for the benefit of a third party and creates only rights for the defendant but not obligations.
To prove his claims the plaintiff can not resort to testimony. So, the evidence adduced by a witness can not be admitted. The unilateral documents such as offers cannot be considered as sufficient evidence because according to Art 432,433 of Civil code of Russian Federation the contract is not concluded, on account of the absence of an agreement between the parties on all substantial conditions of the contract in a juridical form required by law. Furthermore, the defendant did not send any accept.
Even if the plaintiff would deem it necessary to prove that the defendant approved the acts of the plaintiff in his interests and the rules of a contract of commission or other relevant contract should apply according to Art 982 of Civil code of Russian Federation, we should not forget that this article belongs to material law. So, the rules of legal proceedings defined in Art 162 of Civil code of Russian Federation should apply to the case however. Because these norms decide on different matters. That’s why the claimant cannot resort to the testimony as a source of evidence of such an approval, even though the law acknowledges a verbal form of such an approval as necessary and sufficient only for the rules of a relevant contract to apply to such a case.
The converse state of things would bring about a situation when a party could abuse of his rights in definition of a deal. So, the party would have no incentive to comply with the juridical form established for the certain deals, which would lead to a confusion in business relations.
We could also consider the whole case from the other point of view. According to point 1 of Art 1109 of Civil code of Russian Federation, the property delivered in course of the fulfillment of a commitment ahead of schedule before the coming of the term of such a fulfillment cannot be returned as an unfounded acquisition or enrichment. In the relationship of the claimant and defendant, there was not defined the day of the fulfillment of the obligation or a period of time during which the obligation should have been fulfilled. The defendant as a creditor did not request the obligation to be fulfilled. The obligation itself did not arise yet, because there was no agreements between the claimant and the defendant in a required form. That is the position of the defendant. The testimony cannot be adduced according to point 1 0f Art 162 of Civil code of Russian Federation as a consequence of the not-observance of the simple written form of deal required by law for legal entities. Further on there was no agreement between the claimant and defendant about the possibility of the fulfillment ahead of schedule. That’s why according to Art 315 of Civil code of Russian Federation, the fulfillment of the obligation ahead of schedule between the claimant and defendant as parties of business activity is not admissible. So, the 500000 rubles delivered by means of a quasi-account to the defendant by the claimant cannot be recovered as unfounded acquisition or enrichment, because the term of the fulfillment did not come at that moment.
Now, let me act as a scientists not as an advocate.
The weakest part of my argument in the case given is that the court has all reasons to acknowledge the relationship between the claimant and defendant to be the consequence of the acts in another’s interests. That’s the most vulnerable point of the defendant’s position. But this occasional problem cannot be brought to bear on the whole discussion of our juridical question of the correlation and balance between the different norms of civil law in our situation. The question is if a participant of business activity can render a service to a counteragent without his previous consent and if the enjoying of this service by the counteragent means that he consents the conditions offered as average ones defined by market forces.
In the case given, the defendant would have certain advantages if the relationship was considered as the acts in another’s interests and not as unfounded acquisition. Because, according to Art 984 of Civil code of Russian Federation, the claimant should have proved the necessary expenses and real damage, that only can be compensated under the law. And this would mean less than 500000 of cash.
In the conclusion we should acknowledge that in our situation the decision is totally left in discretion of the judge. Even, if he does not refer to the rules dealing with acts in another’s interests, and finds other legal grounds for his decision, still he directs himself by such notions as right and wrong. He considers if there was any evident benefit and profit to the receiver from the acts of such a character. What was the actual or probable intentions of the receiver? Was there enough wariness and circumspection in the acts of the caretaker? But, still in deciding on how much the receiver should pay for the property delivered, service rendered or work done, he should direct himself by law, not the feeling of right and wrong. That means that the receiver should pay the real expenses and damage of the caretaker not the nominal amount of his profits and benefits. This implies that the difference between the market price or cost and the nominal price should be paid by the caretaker in that the acceptance of the receiver is not totally voluntary one. Most important question is if the receiver has the possibility not to enjoy the service, work or property, because this enjoyment means a concluding acceptance of such a work, service or property.
In the conclusion of the whole argument a piece of advice has to be given: keep on alert against a salesman touting his goods in such an obliging way.

P.S. Ending this essay I have just found out that the tax office established in his inquiry that the claimant (construction firm) received this 500000 rubles from the slaughter house as a compensation for the 500000 rubles delivered to defendant (municipality) according to the four-party agreement before it applied to the court and accounted it as a profit.
.

Civil code of Russian Federation

Article 6. The application of the civil law by analogy.
In case when the relations regulated by the Code are not directly ruled by the law or the agreement of parties and there’s no juridical custom that could be applied to this relations, they are, if it is not contrary to their essence, ruled by the civil law regulating similar relations.

Article 15 The compensation of damage.
The real damage is understood to be the expenses that the person whose right was violated, have sustained or should sustain for the restoration of the right violated, loss and detriment of his property.

Article 153. The definition of a deal.
Deals are acknowledged to be the acts of natural persons and legal entities directed to the establishment, change or cessation of civil rights and obligations.

Article 154. Kinds of deals.
1. Deals can be bilateral and multilateral(contracts) and unilateral.
2. A deal is considered as unilateral if the expression of the will of a party is necessary and sufficient for its commitment according to law, other legal acts or an agreement of the parties.
3. For the conclusion of a contract, the expression of the coordinated will of two parties (bilateral deal) or three or more parties (multilateral deal) is necessary for the conclusion of a contract.

Article 155. The obligations out of a unilateral deal.
A unilateral deal creates the obligations for the person that committed the deal. It can create obligations for other persons only in cases stipulated by law or an agreement between these parties.
Article 159. Verbal deals.
1. The deal, for which a written (simple or notarial) form is not required by law or an agreement of the parties, may be concluded verbally.
2. If it is not established otherwise by an agreement of the parties, all deals, fulfilled at the moment of their conclusion, can be concluded verbally, excluding the deals for which a notarial form is required or of which the not-observance of the simple written form entails their invalidity.
3. The deals in exercising of a contract, concluded in a written form, may be concluded verbally if a special agreement of the parties provides so, and it is not contrary to the law, other legal acts or contract.

Article 161. The deals committed in simple written form.
1. The deals of legal entities between themselves and with natural persons should be concluded in a simple written form, barring the cases requiring notarial certification.

Article 162. The consequences of the not-observance of the simple written form of deal.
1. The not-observance of the simple written form of deal deprives its parties of the right to refer in case of a dispute to testimony as evidence of the deal and its conditions, but does not deprive them of the right to adduce written and other evidence.
2. In cases, directly designated by a law or an agreement of the parties the not-observance of the simple written form of deal entails its invalidity.
3. The observance of a simple written form is not required for the deals which can be concluded verbally according to the article 159 of the present Code.

Article 167. The general provisions of the consequences of invalid deal.
1. An invalid deal does not entail any juridical consequences, except those that are connected with its invalid status, and is invalid from the moment of its commitment.
2. When a deal is invalid, each party has to return to the other one all received through the deal, and in case of the impossibility to return the received in kind (including when the received is expressed in the enjoyment of the property, fulfillment of work or rendering of service), to compensate its value in cash, if other consequences of the invalid status of the deal are not stipulated by law.

Article 169. The invalidity of a deal committed with a purpose, contrary to the foundation of legal order and morality.
A deal, committed with a purpose, intentionally contrary to the foundation of legal order and morality is null and void.
When an intention is present with both parties of the deal – in case of the fulfillment of the deal by both parties – all fulfilled by them through the deal will be recovered to the income of Russian Federation, in case of the fulfillment of the deal by only one party, all received by the other party or due to be so will be recovered to the income of Russian Federation.
When the intention is only present with one of the parties of such a deal, all received by this party should be returned to the other one, and the received by the last one or due to be so as a compensation for the fulfillment is to be recovered to the income of Russian Federation.

Article 170. The invalidity of a pretended and affected deal.
1. The pretended deal, that is a deal committed only for the appearance without an intention to create the related to this deal legal consequences, is null and void.
2. The affected deal, that is a deal committed in order to cover up another deal is null and void. To the deal that was really intended by the parties involved, taking into account its essence, the rules related to this deal are applied.

Article 314. The term of the fulfillment of an obligation.
1. If the commitment determines or lets it to be determined the day of its fulfillment, or a period of time during which it should be fulfilled, the commitment is due to be fulfilled in such a day or respectively at any moment in the limits of such a period.
2. In case when the commitment does not determine the term of its fulfillment and does not content any conditions that would make it possible to determine this term, it should be fulfilled in a reasonable term after the commitment have arisen.
3. The commitment, not fulfilled in a reasonable term, and, equally, a commitment of which the term is determined by the moment of demand, the debtor should fulfill it in seven days from the moment when the creditor demanded for its fulfillment, if the obligation of fulfillment in another term does not ensue from law, other legal acts, conditions of the commitment, consuetudinary law or essence of the commitment.

Article 315. The fulfillment of a commitment ahead of schedule.
The debtor has a right to fulfill a commitment ahead of schedule, if it is not provided otherwise by law, other legal acts or the conditions of the commitment, or the contrary does not ensue from its essence. However the fulfillment of commitments connected with the exercising of the business activity by its parties, is permitted only in cases when the possibility to fulfill a commitment ahead of schedule is stipulated by law, other legal acts or the conditions of the commitment, or ensues from the customs of business activity or the essence of the commitment.

Article 984. The recovery of losses to the person acting in another’s interests.
The necessary expenses and other real detriment, run by the person acting in another’s interests in accordance with the rules, stipulated by this chapter, are to be recovered by the person interested, excluding the expenses entailed by the acts in another’s interests, committed after he who have committed them finds out that they are not accepted by the person interested, that do not entail for the last one the obligations neither to the person who have committed them, nor a third party.

Article 430. The contract for the benefit of the third party.
The contract for the benefit of a third party is acknowledge to be a contract in which the parties have agreed that the debtor should carry out the fulfillment not to the creditor, but to a third party, specified or not specified in the contract, that have the right to require the fulfillment of the commitment to his benefit to the debtor.

Article 432. The fundamental rules on the conclusion of contracts.
A contract is concluded, if the parties agreed in a form required for relevant cases on all substantial conditions of the contract.
A contract is concluded by means of sending an offer to conclude a contract by a party and its acceptance by another one.

Article 433. The moment of the conclusion of a contract.
A contract is acknowledged to be concluded at the moment of the reception by the party that sent the offer, of its accept.

Article 980. The conditions of acts in another’s interests.
The acts without commission, other assignment or an acceptance promised in advance by the person interested, with a purpose to prevent the damage to his person and property, to fulfill his obligations or his other not illegal interests (the acts in another’s interests) should be committed according to the obvious benefit and profit and actual or probable intentions of the person interested and with a circumspection and care corresponding to the circumstances of the case.

Article 982. The consequences of the acceptance by the person interested, of the acts in his interests.
If a person, whose interests the acts are undertaken for without a commission, accepts these acts, the rules of a contract of commission or other contract corresponding to the character of the acts undertaken are applied to the relations of the parties, even if the acceptance was a verbal one.
Article 986. The consequences of a deal in another’s interests.
The obligations and rights out of a deal concluded in another’s interests, are passed on to the person whose interests it is committed for, on condition of his acceptance of this deal and if the other party does not object to such a transfer or knew or must have known about this at the moment of the conclusion that the deal was committed for another’s interests.

Article 987. The unfounded acquisition owing to acts in another’s interests.
If acts, not directed immediately to the provision of the interests of another person, including the case when the person, who have committed them, falsely presumed to act for his own interests, led to the unfounded enrichment or acquisition of another person, the rules of unfounded acquisition of Code are applied

Article 1103. The correlation of the claims for the return of unfounded acquisition with other claims of the protection of civil rights.
If not provided otherwise by this Code, other laws or legal acts and does not ensue from the essence of the relevant relations, the rules defined under this chapter, are also to be applied to the claims:
1) of the return of the fulfilled through an invalid deal
2) of one party of a commitment to another about the return of the fulfilled in connection with this commitment.

Article 1109. The unfounded enrichment and acquisition not to be received.
The following cannot be recovered as unfounded enrichment and acquisition:
1) The property delivered in fulfillment of obligation before the coming of the term of fulfillment.
4) Sums of money and other property, delivered in course of the implementation of a not-existing commitment, if the acquirer will prove that the person requiring the return of the property have known about the absence of any obligation or delivered the property in charitable purposes.

What for the registration chamber is necessary

The state registration of real estate businesses ascends the roots to the roman law. Initially, the earth and other real estate it was sold with observance of the special legal form, named true recovery. At true recovery as an original ceremony of purchase and sale transfer of several kgs of copper was carried out, other elements of the given ritual took place. For example, got out pair of boys of seven, eight years (on one from each party) which were exposed to an easy beating so that these boys have remembered the given event and could testify in its advantage becoming adults. However, the given ritual was too difficult and during an economic development epoch in Ancient Rome it has been replaced by the responsibility of the parties to register the bargain at the special government official named претором. Now, to observe the bargain form, it was necessary to register simply it at претора which introduced corresponding data to the register of bargains. So such body as registration chamber in that measure in what it takes place in the continental legal system was generated.
Many believe that the given service from outside the states very expensive and is connected with the big expenses of time. But here is with what to compare. For example, in the English-Saxon legal system (Great Britain and the USA) the state registration of real estate businesses is absent. Than and how it is compensated? There are special firms of attorneys which specialise on research of legal history of this or that object of the real estate for the purpose to secure the buyer against possible claims from outside third persons. Insurance upon possible loss of the real estate owing to claims of third persons takes place also. It occurs besides through granting of the given service by such firm of attorneys. The total sum of costs at the given scheme reaches twenty, thirty percent from an amount of payment for object of the real estate as a whole. Advantage of the uniform state register here is obvious.
Many believe that at the Soviet power the mechanism of the state registration of transition of the property on objects of the real estate was much easier. But it is not necessary to forget that it was compensated by difficult rules of a residence permit on a residence and the total control of the state over a life of the citizens. And economic conditions for frauds in the real estate market it was not simple. There was no necessity to acquire the starting capital to attend to business. Therefore about mass abusings in this sphere could not be and speeches. But time has exchanged, living conditions in company have exchanged and the increased control of the state over actions of citizens at a real estate turn-over is quite justified. It is not necessary to forget also that registration of real estate business in village councils too was the state registration as these bodies were included into the general system of the Soviet power.
In work of any state structure always there are elementary accuracy requests in clerical work. Therefore it is difficult to reproach the worker of registration chamber that they often insist on correct filling of this or that document. It is often necessary to fill in correctly figures or letters in this or that data card. In general, possibilities of any bureaucratic abusings within the limits of process of the state registration are brought almost to naught as all actions are made under the accurate legal scheme and any "necessary" decision theoretically cannot be.
As a whole, all process of the state registration of real estate business is directed on maintenance of interests of the parties, especially the buyer. At its infringement the reference to the court and additional charges on the recognition of the property right arising in normal conditions from the moment of its state registration is inevitable. It would be desirable to expect for understanding from outside the citizens addressing to registration chamber.

The documents from my own legal practice:

To European Court of Human
Rights of Council of Europe
from Zuzin Max Yuryevich,
the representative of Zuzin
Yury Ivanovich

Application for assistance
The fifteenth of May of 2001, Shushensky district court of Krasnoyarsky kray considered in the open judicial inquiry the case of the suit of Filial “Southern” of “Krasnoyarsk-oil-production, Inc.” Agaist Zolotukhin Petr Semenovich, Shatrova Irina Grigoryevna, Zuzin Yury Ivanovich, Kaskaev Mikhail Egorovich, Prihodko Sergey Alexandrovich for the compensation of the damage caused by the workers and satisfied its claim in the part of recovering the shortage of fuel, that was discovered during the act of inspection of 4 of November of 1999.
The court groundlessly considered as an established one the fact that the above-mentioned operators of the filling station 112 had used fuel for their personal needs, delivered fuel without payment. The penal investigation carried out did not confirm the version of the misappropriation and embezzlement of the property that was entrusted to them. This conclusion did not follow from the investigation carried out of the materials of the case in the course of the civil law trial, either.
Besides, it was not mentioned in the decision made by the judge that the payment of the money into the cashier’s office of the enterprise and filling the diesel fuel acquired by them as guarantors from State Enterprise “Magistral”, into the reservoir of the filling station 112, were committed under the influence of the threat of the illegal penal proceedings by the way of the fabrication of a criminal case and the possible application of the physical violence on the part of the representatives of the criminal structures, expressed by the head of the security of the “Krasnoyarsk-oil-product” Veselovsky and the director of the Filial “Southern” Chmackalo. Therefore those actions of the workers of the filling station 112 should not be considered as pleading guilty of the arise of the shortage.
The administration let the one-year time limit expire with a delay of more than one and a half-month. Whereas the judicial practice does not come on the way of restoring this term in respect of administrations, which dispose of qualified lawyers. The more so, because there was not found by the court no valid excuses in the first nor second instance, since the reference to the appliance to the economic crimes department for the establishment of the causes of the shortage and the guilty persons, can not be considered as a valid excuse, because the investigation was carried out in a one-sided way and no facts, which would confirm the point that there was a direct actual damage, caused by the acts of the guilty persons, were not revealed. There’s only the avowal of the senior operator Zuzin Yury Ivanovich that the shortage might also be in a certain degree brought about due to his non-persistent position in respect of the administration, which looked through the their fingers at the situation that had developed at the filling station 112, because he must have stopped the work without the permission of the administration. But even this avowal was caused by the desire to cease the illegal penal persecution in a hard situation in life which had taken place in his family as a result of this illegal penal prosecution. The more so, that after the completion of the penal prosecution in the beginning of the June of 1999, the administration disposed of several months to apply to the court. The term that is much longer than the term provided by the law for the workers to defend their right in court.
The court in its decision admitted some discrepancies as to the facts that took place. In his monthly reports the senior operator Zuzin Yury Ivanovich has shown the increase of the shortage, the administration of Filial “Southern” might not be brought into misconception, either, because it had known about the increase of the shortage during each subsequent month, but did not take measures. It is proved by the point that the act of inspection describes the dynamics of the shortage monthly and not only in the year as a whole. As to the point that the external equipment, including the gas station A-80, was not in working order, the master of the filling station Salnickov had known about it, but in spite of the requirements of the operators did not take measures.
The decision does not reflect the fact that in June of 1999 the senior operator Zuzin Yury Ivanovich required the execution of the inspection and the suspension of the work of the filling station 112, considering the dynamics of the increase of the shortage. All the above-mentioned facts were stated by the defendants in the course of the court investigation and confirmed by the material of the civil of the suit of the workers of the filling station 112 to Filial “Southern” about the restoring on the work and the recovery of the average earnings for the time of the enforced idleness.
The court found without sufficient grounds that the cause of the shortage might not be the over-stating of the specific gravity of fuel, systematically executed by the administration. For all this, the only argument of this conclusion is the fact that the increase of the shortage had taken place in the winter months, too, when, according to the opinion of the court, the natural fluctuations of the specific gravity would contribute to the rise of the surplus. However, it is not so. The reason is that the reservoirs in the petrol store are situated on the surface under the influence of the sun-light and get warmed even in winter, but not so intensively as in summer. Further on, this warmed fuel is filled into the trucks and delivered to the filling station, where it is filled into reservoirs that are in the icy land. When it gets there, the fuel becomes cold and decrease in volume sharply. The sixteen-cube-meters fuel-carrier, for example, filled with warm fuel, after pouring off into the underground reservoir, gives the shortage of about 350-400 liters. When the workers of the filling station 112 had begun to present the pretensions about the shortage, the accounts department of the petrol store objected, as it seemed quite reasonably, that the fuel-carrier was full up to the mark and the liters, which were written in the invoice, were delivered to the filling station and poured off into the reservoir. But the most interesting thing is that the petrol store itself assigns fuel by liters and the filling station reports back in liters, but the petrol store gives all its account in kilograms. In each invoice, the specific gravity is over-stated and it turns out that, according to the documents, every fuel-carrier takes from the petrol store to the filling station, 250-300 kilos of fuel more than it is really. This 250-300 kilos off each fuel-carrier settles down on the petrol store as the surplus that is then distributed to the other filling station of Filial “Southern”. The representatives of Filial “Southern” took notice of the point that out of six filling stations of Filial “Southern” only one (though this statement is not proved really by any facts) filling station 112 got in such a situation. It sounds reasonable also, however it is very important here to take into account the complex relations of the filling station 112 and Filial “Southern” that were the consequences of the conflict about the non-observance of the rules of the labor protection on the filling station 112 that took place in 1998 year. The administration were interested in the artificial creation of the shortage. That great surplus, which administration has from the manipulations with specific gravity, gives it ability to decrease without difficulty or to eliminate at all any shortage that arises on any filling station that is loyal in respect of administration. In the reality, the winter months of the beginning of the year are the time of the very insignificant part of shortage according to the ratio of the length of time and the amount of the shortage. The main volume of the shortage arose in the warm months of the year. The dynamics of its increase is in a functional dependence of the volume of fuel received in each month. The significant jump of the amount of the shortage, which took place in October of 1999 is explained by the point that the temperature in the reservoirs on the filling station 112 decreased in comparison to the summer indices because of the night early frosts, but fuel continued to get warm on the petrol store under the influence of the sun beams in the day time. However the final answer to the question of what volume of the shortage was caused by the over-statement of the specific gravity of fuel, might only be given by the expertise which was requested by defendants. But the court, on the incomprehensible grounds, declined this solicitation which, taking into account the sum of the suit demands of about 60000 rubles and the key character of this question, is obviously unfounded. What is more, the statements of the defendants about the systematical under-carriage of fuel apart from the over-stating of the specific gravity were not taken into account, that is the obvious actual under-carriage that took place in the very moment of the arrival of the fuel-carrier before pouring off into the reservoir. These acts are in the other case of the suit of the workers of the filling station 112 against the administration, which was mentioned above.
The substantiation of the guilt of the workers in the formation of the shortage of fuel is built in the most part upon the materials of the penal case, that were stated in the decision of the refusal to institute penal proceedings against Zuzin Yury Ivanovich in connection with the amnesty.
According to the regulations of Civil Code of Russian Federation, the plaintiff should prove the direct actual damage caused by the guilty actions of the workers. But he did not do this. The only one thing he managed to prove, taking into account the materials of the penal case, was the fact of the non-systematical putting down the every shift measuring the level of fuel in the reservoir into the diary of the reception and passing the shift. All the same, the workers took the measures of the level of fuel every shift for their own information. The court considered that this created the conditions for a possible misappropriation of oil products, since if the due accounting of the fuel were organized, when a commitment of the stealing took place, this fact would be detected at once. However the facts of the misappropriation were not revealed in the course of the penal investigation. The presence of the cause-effect relationship between an inconsiderable number of the purely formal infringements committed by the workers of the filling station 112, which were mentioned above, and the formation of the shortage was not proved. The question of where and how fuel could disappear, even if it were carried there, was not answered. The only possibility of the disappearance of fuel in case it had been delivered to the filling station 112, what was not in reality, would have been pumping fuel out of the reservoirs by the special equipment. Moreover, this should have been executed during all the months of the year, several times in relation to every reservoir each month, taking into account the capacity of a fuel-carrier, on every kind of fuel, that is out of several reservoirs. To take out fuel through a normal way, that is by the pumps, is not possible if you want to stay unnoticed, since, in this case, the shortage of the money in the cash-desk is inevitable, because of the difference in the readings of the computer of the cost of the liters of the fuel sold and the quantity of the money in the cash-desk. The point that the defendants Shatrova I.G., Zuzin Y.I., Prikhodko S.A., refueled their cars in debt with the knowledge of the master Salnockov for the purpose to get to the work, brought about the formation of the shortage namely in the cash-desk, but not in the reservoirs, and in a much less amount, exactly 4169 rubles, which the operator Zuzin Y.I. did not withdraw correspondingly.
As a prove of his requirements, the plaintiff did not adduce anything convincing, just the circumstances that had no relation to the case. For example, when he had no possibility to explain in a reasonable way why the increase of the shortage took place after the introduction of the immediate control of master Salnickov over the work of the operators of the filling station 112 (he executed the reception of the fuel-carriers, measurement and accounting). The plaintiff cited the discovery of the fact of the non-standard glass upon the gas-meter of the pump that ostensibly took place, which, according to the opinion of the court, allowed to change the reading of the total counter of the pump with the aid of narrow instruments. In addition, the court, counting the above-mentioned circumstances as a foundation of the acknowledgement of the guiltiness of the workers in the formation of the shortage of fuel, did not take into consideration that, first, this glass plate had been installed by the operators of the filling station but by other people with the knowledge of Salnickov himself, secondly, its reading could have been changed only insignificantly, taking into account the special construction of the mechanism of the total counter (its device is analogous to this of an automobile’s speedometer), third, to influence this instrument has no sense, since in case if somebody had gotten out fuel by the pump, then this would have been reflected on the readings of the computer and the cash-desk, that is would not have stayed unnoticed.
Besides, the court did not take into consideration the guilt of the administration, which should have been done according to the article 1083 of Civil Code of Russian Federation. The court did not also take into account the point that the administration had not observed the regulations of the collective material responsibility agreement, did not create the conditions for the collective, which were necessary to execute the obligations undertaken in a proper way, namely: it did not react to the complaints on the over-statement of the specific gravity and systematical under-carriage, did not take measures on the requirements of the carrying out of an extra inspection (these documents are in the above-mentioned case of the suit of the collective of the filling station 112 against the administration), did not ensure the working order of the machinery (for instance, to the request to regulate the pump that over-distributed the oil, the master Salnickov declared that it is a very complex task and the realization of fuel is necessary to get profits, that is there was no time for a repair).
Thus, the court admitted the infringement of not only the material but also the process law. The conclusion of the court about the guiltiness of the defendants in the formation of the shortage of fuel does not correspond to the circumstances of the case. The court counted the guilt of the defendants to be established, though this was not confirmed by the material of the case.
The third of September of 2001 year Court Board on civil cases of Krasnoyarsk Regional Court determined the decision of Shushensky district court of 15 of May of 2001 to be left without any changes, and the appeal of Zuzin Y.I. and his representative Zuzin Y.I. without satisfaction.
The court of appeal instance made a conclusion without sufficient grounds that the defendants recognized the fact of the shortage. The fact that they paid the money does not mean the acknowledgement of the shortage as directly and actually caused by their guilty actions, since this was made under the moral pressure of the threats of the physical influence of an illegal character and the promise to give back their money after the clarification of the circumstances. The same is the situation with 6660 liters of diesel fuel received from the State enterprise “Magistral”. Besides, the workers of the filling station acknowledged the fact that, according to the data of the cashier’s office a shortage took place, but not their guilt in causing the actual damage which was not proved by the court of the first nor second instance. The court of the appeal instance did not also take into account the guilt of the administration, having denoted that the defendants did not present the corresponding evidence. Incidentally, it did not take into consideration that such evidence had been presented in the case of the suit of the workers of the filling station 112 against administration about the restoration on the work and the payment of the compensation for the time of the enforced idleness, which the judge Zabbarov had known of, but did not count it necessary to investigate, although the defendants stated a corresponding verbal solicitation. The second copies of the acts on the undercarriage of fuel, reports and notes of explanation, in which the workers required the administration of Filial “Southern” to take measures already in the July of 1999 year, the diary of the reception and passing on the shift with an analysis of the observations requests and offers, intended to the address of the administration, where the negligent attitude of the plaintiff to his part of the obligations of the collective material responsibility agreement is reflected, were not investigated. Besides, neither the court of the first nor the second instance did not count it necessary to conduct an examination by experts on the question of how the over-stating of the specific gravity of fuel could influence the formation of this fictitious (according to our point of view) and purely token shortage, the cause of which is only the financial machinations on the part of the administration and accounts department. What is more, the court did not take into account that the investigation was built upon the foundation of the official instruction of the senior operator that had been a free unit, whereas at the moment of the inspection this unit had been eliminated and the “senior” operator was on duty in his shifts, as the other operator, for several years already. The fact of the systematical confusions and disrepair in the work of the computer that influenced the accounting, were not taken into consideration.
The conclusion of the court that the collective of the filling station 112 and, among their number the senior operator, did not show the shortage leading the administration into the misconception, is groundless. The collective did not have the data of the shortage and all that could cause its formation had been reported to the administration. The master of the filling station 45 along with the fitter, had been informed of all the breakage and disrepair, but did not take measures. The reference to the point that there had been one more shortage earlier in 1998 year, that was liquidated at the expense of the workers by the way of the deduction of their salaries, does not prove that it had been the same as the shortage of 1999 year caused by Decree of Presidium of Supreme Soviet of USSR of 13 of July of 1976 year, that confirmed the regulations of full material responsibility of workers and employees that are guilty for the damage caused to enterprise, institution, organization should bear the material responsibility only with the presence of a direct actual damage. The materials of the case do not prove that, first, there was an actual damage, that is the missing fuel had actually been carried to the filling station and disappeared, second, the damage was direct, that is it was caused by the actions of the workers and not by the other causes, third, the workers were guilty of causing damage even if it would have taken place. The main question of where the fuel disappeared even if it would have been received by the filling station was left unanswered. When to reply to this question, it is necessary to take into consideration that fuel could have been taken out of only through the calculation mechanism of which the work was checked in 1999 year by the tax department for 4 times and no infringements were detected. It is obvious that the fuel did not disappear from the reservoir of the filling station 112 by the way other than the accounting mechanism, that is technically and practically impossible, because it had not been received in the necessary quantity there as a result of the manipulations with the specific gravity. Thus, it does not evoke the doubt that there is not the actual direct damage nor as a result of it the guilt of the workers of the filling station 112. The arguments of the administration that the new workers have had no shortage only prove the version about its fictitious character based on the false accountancy and other calculations of the administration. The aim of this action is to deal with the old collective of the filling station 112, struggling for their labor rights and to enrich themselves at the innocent workers expense and at the expense of the mother-organization “Krasnoyarsk-oil-product,Inc.” Misappropriating the fuel distributed to Filial “Southern” for the realization of it by the way of its selling through the illegal channels of the black accountancy.
The court of the first and the appeal instance violated the part 2 of the article 1064 of Civil Code of Russian Federation, because the defendants were not guilty, the article 1083 of Civil Code of Russian Federation, since the damage was a result of the intention, and in some part the gross negligence of the plaintiff, the property situation of the workers of the filling station 112 was not taken into consideration, the article 221 of Code of Laws on Labor, due to the point that the court restored the term missed to apply to the court without valid excuse, the articles 1102-1109 of Civil Code of Russian Federation, owing to the fact that Filial “Southern” received 6660 liters of the diesel fuel from the State enterprise “Magistral” without any reasonable grounds and should return it (the workers of the filling station 112 only gave the guarantee to the state enterprise “Magistral” that Filial “Southern” would pay for the fuel delivered, directed to replenish the temporary lack of diesel fuel on the filling station 112, but did not write a statement to direct it at the account of the fictitious shortage. Thus, the material law was violated.
The court of the first and second instance did also violate the article 50 of Civil Process Code of Russian Soviet Federative Socialistic Republic, since the plaintiff did not prove the circumstances of the guiltiness and the existence of the actual damage due to the guilt of the workers, the article 56 of Civil Process Code of Russian Soviet Federative Socialistic Republic, since the court did not consider the evidence thoroughly and fully in its totality, and the evidence important for the case, was not investigated, the evidence important for the case, was not investigated, the articles 74-78 of Civil Process Code of Russian Soviet Federative Socialistic Republic, since the court declined the solicitation of the execution of an expertise, the result of which could directly influence the establishment of the verity in the case, the article 156 of Civil Process Code of Russian Soviet Federative Socialistic Republic, since the court of the first instance declined the solicitation of ordering an expertise before the beginning of the trial without hearing the opinion of the persons that took part in the case, the article 191 of Civil Process Code of Russian Soviet Federative Socialistic Republic, since the decision is not legal and well-founded, the article 194 of Civil Process Code of Russian Soviet Federative Socialistic Republic, since the court did not appraise the evidence of the guilt of the plaintiff, which the defendants had solicited of and which might have influenced the outcome of the case, the article 306 of Civil Process Code of Russian Soviet Federative Socialistic Republic, since the appeal instance did not repeal the decision of the first instance court, whereas the legally significant circumstances were not defined in a proper way and the circumstances that has a bearing on the case which the court deemed to be established were not proved.
Proceeding from the above-mentioned points and being directed by the articles 320,321,322,329 part 2,5 of Civil Process Code of Russian Soviet Federative Socialistic Republic, according to the part 1 of the article 6 of Convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms that provides for that everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law, request that the measures founded in law should be taken in a proper way to protect my client’s rights violated by infringing the law be protected according to the procedure prescribed by the law.

Sincerely yours, Zuzin Maxim Yuryevich
_________________________________

The agreement on lawyer services

1. Concluding the given agreement, the parties recognise that failure of the qualified lawyer of a legal aid to the persons pursued by law-enforcement agencies without observance of criminal procedure warranties, is a crime in partnership in the form of inactivity in the presence of possibility to ensure justice of justice.
2. As in this case application of rules of lawyer secret in accordance with general practice is not provided, the parties recognise that failure of the lawyer give testimony on business can to be caused the justifiable defence (legal protection) and emergency (maintenance of justice of justice).
3. Actions of the lawyer on the legal protection realisation, formally falling as an actus reus in partnership with the client in destruction of proofs, can take place only for bar of claim by lapse of time of the possible certificate of the gibbet law.
4. Actions of the attorney formally falling under недоносительство about heavy and especially grave crimes about which he has learnt during consultation, can be justified in criminally-legal sense besides from a justifiable defence and emergency item.
5. The Lawyer carries out legal protection of the client irrespective of a legal item last and even after a possible summer residence last grateful indications for the purpose observance of all warranties of legitimacy within the limits of justice.
6. The Given services are granted on возмездной to a basis and the price of services is advanced for each case separately.

The agreement of services

1. The Given agreement is the quadrilateral agreement of the organizer, the security guard, women of rendering service in the given agreement and the client.
2. The Given agreement is the civil agreement with observance of a liberty principle of will and is not the labour contract.
3. The Parties recognise that the law the presumption of illegality of the given activity in criminal sense is provided and such activity can be caused only emergency: prevention of distribution venereal and infectious diseases which are possible at non-observance of safety conditions of sexual relations and absence of medical warranties of regular inspection of sexual partners, cases of an adultery and possible violent it possible violent and other crimes, and also the cases connected with such grave crime as rape.
4. The Organizer guarantees regular medical examination of the woman, rendering service by agreement.
5. Under the given agreement the woman renders services of sexual character.
6. The Security guard ensures safety of the woman, rendering service in the given agreement and the client.

7. The Law provides a presumption of illegality of involving of women in the given activity, therefore services in the given agreement are granted only in the presence of the emergency consisting in impossibility to earn money resources on the urgent purposes in another way (necessity to pay expensive treatment to the relative, acquisition of housing accommodation for persons not ensured by that from outside the states, etc.)
8. On all occasions breaches of the contract the organizer has the right to find out all facts of the case with unmotivated desire to find out how much has suffered its reputation causing its incomes both its safety and its relatives and relatives.
9. The Sum of a payment of the client for one hour constitutes 2000 roubles, and for night of 6000 roubles.
10. The Amount of income extends between the organizer, the security guard and the woman of rendering service by agreement in the ratio: 20 % to the woman of rendering service by agreement, 10 % of the security guard, 70 % to the organizer.
11. From the sum received by the organizer it has the right to spend in the personal interests of 10 % from the given sum. 90 % from the sum paid to the organizer arrive in a relief fund the prisoner, relatives and relatives of whom has no possibility to grant the prisoner the help provided by the criminally-corrective legislation (parcels with a foodstuff and clothes, etc.)
12. The Above-stated item of the agreement is caused by that the majority of prisoners endure the punishment for the minor offences which have caused a small economic damage. Whereas such persons work in various branches of economy on government enterprises and bring a significant income to company.

13. It also is caused by necessity of socialisation of persons, before making grave crimes, and material aid by it in the form of the credit for the purpose of prevention of violent crimes.
14. The Organizer consists in the informal organisation a clan of thieves in the law and is the thief in the law.
15. As the law provides a presumption of illegality of the above-stated organisation, the organizer connects the life membership in the given organisation only with the above-stated purposes connected with the frictionless resolution of disputes in company and between separate persons. All other actions of the organizer should be caused only emergency and justifiable defence reasons.
16. It is necessary to notice for correct interpretation of the term «the thief in the law», applied in the given agreement that it is primary on a criminal slang means (literally) that the person occupying given position in the organisation of the criminal should act strictly under the state law for bar of claim by lapse of time of the conflict criminal with other company, namely suppression of criminality by means of socialisation of the persons regularly committing crimes, and development of economy in the environment of such socialisation on the basis of concrete projects of lawful economic activities, and also to prevention of answer-back crimes concerning the persons deprived of freedom and as a whole of persons, pursued by law-enforcement agencies «the thief in the law» means The term that the given logic contradiction means necessity of its permission for an everyday life.
17. The Organizer undertakes to make the decisions having considerable economic character and connected with activity, регулироваемой the given agreement, only with allowance for opinions of other thieves in the law.
18. In case of need fulfilment of actions within the limits of the justifiable defence, expressly or by implication connected with the given agreement and formally forming structure heavy or especially grave crime, such actions can be made only from the preliminary consent of Federal Agency of safety of the Russian Federation and only in case of evasion of the person who have committed a counter crime from the criminal liability when such person represents considerable danger to company and can commit other crimes, including for the purpose of evasion from the criminal liability on earlier completed offence when such actions of the given guilty person inevitably would entail toughening of measures the general of the criminal prevention, applied as a matter of fact concerning concrete persons.

19. In other cases of similar character when the client under the agreement, has infringed upon the rights of the woman, rendering services in the given agreement, in penal sense, the organizer has the right to carry out criminal prosecution through militia bodies.
20. As the criminal law assumes a presumption of criminality of any assistance in the use by the person narcotic and psychotropic drugs the organizer makes all necessary and possible actions on maintenance of such state of affairs when the woman who is rendering service under the given agreement, uses narcotics and psychotropic substances only within the limits of process of medical treatment for such dependence. The agreement parties recognise that any use of drugs can be caused only medical indications and biological factors for prevention of negative consequences of an information shock. Lawful incomes of trade in narcotic substances can be economically justified only in the presence of profit which is possible only in cases of natural decrease in the offer in such market and growth of a retail price for a dose of the drug, the buying power of the population caused by growth. Any lawful trade in narcotic substances is possible only under the control of Federal Agency of safety of the Russian Federation within the limits of special operations when action formally assuming availability of an actus reus is made for the purpose of the general and private prevention of crimes.
21. The Security guard carries out protection of the woman, rendering service in the given agreement, and the client.
22. The Security guard and the organizer make all actions on maintenance of absolute safe conducts for the woman, rendering service in the given agreement, and the client, meant by concept employment with observance of a principle of absolute legality when the organizer recognises that a crime can be made and in the form of inactivity which in the presence of possibility of the organizer will evade in sharing in a crime in such form assumes necessity of fulfilment of active actions on suppression of possible crimes from outside other persons.
23. The Woman renders services in the given agreement with observance of the constitutional principle of equality of the woman and voluntary that excludes possibility of any physical and mental violence.
24. The Client has not the right to use under the given agreement at availability at it venereal or an infectious disease about which he knows. Otherwise he is obliged to compensate the caused damage.
25. In the rest the agreement is subject to action of the Civil code of the Russian Federation and other positions of the law.

Lawful positions about gambling-debts
1. The Card play on interest is the guessing form on purpose to find out, who from players has deserved a prize from an item of such beliefs as destiny, карма, good luck which have a scientific explanation.
2. Rolled (the professional player in cards) can take only advantage of experience, engineering of game and correct strategy of a card play.
3. Any use of methods of gambling infringing its rules (шулерство) can take place only by counter granting to the client of services of the organisation of its rest and safety.
4. Gambling-debts are not supported by possibility of a reference to the court for protection of the rights, won in game on interest. Nevertheless, at general conditions the gambling-debt is a civil-law bargain (the bargain connected with approach of possible event in the future: a prize) which assumes self-defence of the rights within the limits of the Civil code and possibility of application of positions of the criminal law about emergency and the justifiable defence.

Lawful positions about the general fund of mutual support (общаке)

1. The Law assumes legal regulation of civil-law relations irrespective of their registration in writing.
2. The Clan of thieves in the law is the organisation of self-management among prisoners and the persons committing latent (not registered) crimes and forming in the set civil company as a whole.
3. It is necessary to recognise that all crimes are made by persons to whom warranties of a lawful method of their satisfaction of the requirements mortgaged by the nature are not given.
4. It is necessary to start with the following also: the mutual support fund is formed as the joint income from activity of the persons who for whatever reasons do not have supports of the state in protection of their rights and legitimate interests which is supposed the law as illegal proceeding from a presumption of illegality of some acts. Such income assumes that it is the form of self-defence of the civil rights criminal and political prisoners as consequence of non-recognition by other company of its responsibility to compensate to the persons, working on government facilities, a difference between an economic damage from a crime on each concrete business individually and the sum of payments to the given persons within the limits of the penal system whereas it is caused by civil-law institute of unjust enrichment.
5. Each thief in the law is the informal individual businessman without official registration and its civil responsibility is statutory.
6. The mutual support Fund is a society in participation authorised capital stock (the agreement of a society in participation without formation of the legal person) individual businessmen of thieves in the law.
7. Non-observance of the written form of the agreement indicated in the previous item though deprives of the party of the given agreement of possibility of use in court a testimony, but does not deprive of their right to furnish other proofs in court confirming to availability of the agreement of a society in participation.

Lawful rules of realisation of advice of thieves in the law (a meeting, толковище)

1. Meeting of thieves in the law to be conducted on a voluntary basis.
2. The opinion of all thieves in the law, both present on advice, and not present, but ensured availability of the written instrument about their opinion Is considered.
3. The Thief in the law presides over advice on a joint decision of other thieves in the law, present on advice, with allowance for opinions of thieves in the law not present on advice, but ensured in writing the legal claims.
4. Presence improvised (trump фраеров) is supposed on advice of thieves in the law only for maintenance of efficiency of performance of decisions of thieves in the law, thieves accepted within the limits of advice in the law.
5. Presence of correct boys (soldiers) on advice of thieves in the law is supposed only in exceptional cases for safety of thieves present on advice in the law and improvised.
6. Improvised (козырный фраер) can have only a deliberative vote with allowance for its opinions concerning actions entrusted to it within the limits of the decision of thieves in the law concerning those urgent circumstances which have caused emergency in realisation of advice of thieves in the law.
7. At realisation of advice of thieves in the law in the places of confinement presence of the passive homosexuals who have become by those as consequence of fulfilment of a violent crime against the woman on sexual soil (cocks) is not supposed.

8. The Thief in the law, making certificates of passive homosexuality without availability for this purpose legal grounds (the offended thief) have not the right to be present on advice of thieves at the law. Its opinion, expression is in writing considered, but it has only a deliberative vote. It is the adviser (консильери).
9. The Decision of questions of economic character occurs during gamblings on interest (rate) to observance of all rules of each gambling with preliminary definition of this or that version of the game advanced to a geographical sign.
10. At the decision of questions advanced necessity of realisation of advice of thieves for the law each thief in the law should consider that the advice common decision should consist of accurate instructions for improvised and general supervising decisions for correct boys.
11. To Play cards on improvised (trump фраера) for the purpose to find out, who should was temporary to give it instructions it is not supposed. The decision on its transition from one group over which the thief in the law supervises, in other can be admitted only with with observance of rules of transition in other group.
12. Presence of managers (положенцев) is supposed for the account of their opinion on economic validity of this or that decision of advice of thieves in the law.
13. To Play cards on the correct boy it is not authorised, as such actions could degrade its human dignity.
14. To Play cards on питуха it is authorised, but not on advice of thieves in the law, and in case of personal meeting of two thieves in the law. The availability of the third thief in the law forms a meeting.
15. All negotiations on advice to be blown only on a criminal slang (hair dryer). It is done for the purpose conspiracy observance.

16. The Thief in the law should have at itself a pure pack of playing cards and narcotic substances in the single dose advanced by the law. The availability more than one dose of narcotic substance with itself is not supposed, as it can form an actus reus provided by the criminal law.
17. On advice poker on five cards, one thousand, the nine is supposed such card games as twenty one.
18. At the decision of the most serious questions the gambling of four kings (hundred one on the contrary) is supposed only.
18.1 Rules of gambling of four kings: 1) банкующий shuffles cards and allows to shift a pack to the player to the left of it. Then distributes on four cards to players, to itself three cards and opens a card with which game begins, 2) With whom remained cards, the sum goes to a minus. The one who has typed – 101 (sum of points) earlier has won. Those cards which are played leave in plus to the one who remained without cards. If the lady to throw necessarily. Points in this case increase. Who has typed 1001 (sum of points), bowls off.
19. On a meeting the thief in the law can have a pistol.
20. The thief in the law is obliged to have such system of religious beliefs which will ensure him possibility to understand significance of the actions and to supervise over them in any reality situation (stress, narcotic intoxication).
21. Thieves in the law should inform public authorities on a place and time of realisation of a meeting for the purpose prevention of a possible round-up, and as consequence of it falling of authority of a clan of thieves in the law. It is done also for the purpose maintenance of a quiet situation in civil company in a place of realisation of a meeting. The militia and special services have possibility to ensure protection of reputation of each thief in the law and advice as a whole in the presence of absolute warranties of observance of the state laws from outside thieves in the law.
21.1 All community of the criminal ensures absolute warranties of observance of laws of procedure of thieves in the law in case of need to offer to law-enforcement agencies an explanation concerning the concrete facts which have caused necessity of realisation of a meeting. It is carried out within the limits of an emergency and justifiable defence legal institution.
22. As the persons pursued by law-enforcement agencies for minor offences, done to economy insignificant harm, have no warranty of the qualified legal aid, the thief in the law should be expert in the right.

Inheritance rules in a family of the thief in the law

1. The Thief in the law not in the right to bequeath the business to children without fulfilment last all concepts of thieves' honour and acquisition of the status of the thief in the law in accordance with general practice.
2. Children of a female can come into a fortune from the father of the thief in the law at acquisition of the status of the thief similar to the status in the law (mum, донна, etc.) within the limits of activity of a part of the penal system of the state for women (female colonies).
3. In other cases children of the thief in the law do not receive de jure recognition and qualify as concept a major.

Special cases of the status of thieves in the law

1. The Thief in the law which father gave KGB of the USSR or FSB of the Russian Federation a subscription that its children on a man's line are obliged to co-operate with special services, not in the right to abuse the social status and will evade from instalments to fund of mutual support of prisoners in whole and criminal (общак) from the incomes received by it personally as compensation for successfully carried out special actions within the limits of activity of the above-stated services of state security.
2. However, such thief in the law introduces money resources to mutual support fund only on a voluntary basis.

Legal status of the thief in the law at serving of term by it in the places of confinement.

1. The Thief in the law is the informal head of informal trade union of prisoners and the arbitration judge.
2. The Looking thief in the law is the arbitration judge.
3. Polozhenets is responsible for material supplies of prisoners.

Rules of transition improvised (trump фраера) from one geographical group of a clan of thieves in the law in other

1. Kozyrnyj фраер passes from one geographical group of a clan of thieves in the law in other on the basis of availability of family ties in that district where it passes.
2. The Decision on transition is accepted by it personally and made out by the written decision of two thieves in the law (from a place of the beginning of transition and the transition end).
3. On transition the thief in the law should have at itself the documents proving its identity (ксива, аусвайс) and the document with conditions of its transition (маляву, пиццини).

Legal status of the thief in the law

1. The Thief in the law receives the given position in company criminal on the basis of fulfilment of the act, having the consequence a grant-in-aid concluded and being the form of civil-law self-defence of their rights from unjust enrichment of company from a difference from an economic damage from crimes and the income of the state of operation of work of prisoners.
2. Other condition of reception of a rank of the thief in the law is runaway from the places of confinement as the form of the justifiable defence from an illegal sentence.
3. The Thief in the law receives the rank on the basis of the civil-law guarantee of two thieves in the law.
4. Thieves in the law are divided on peak (caucasus, Transcaucasia, Central Asia) and Slavs.
5. Concerning the thief in the law objective imputation is not supposed. He answers only in the presence of fault. In a case if the thief in the law has given the lawful commission any criminal, and last in turn unreasonably believes to carry out the instruction of the thief given to it in the law criminally, the first does not answer in sense of the criminal law as the case in point does not form partnership. It is especially important for considering at availability in the criminal law of a presumption of illegality of all not state organisations of regulation of legal relations in company in the presence of the mechanism and an enforcement machinery.

Legal status improvised (trump фраера)

1. Kozyrnyj фраер is obliged to execute commissions of the thief in the law and to follow its instructions.
2. The First commission improvised always executes within a trial period.

Explanation concerning responsibility of association of proprietors of housing accommodation on municipal payments, for the services represented in houses in which relation ТСЖ carries out functions of the operating organisation.

According to item 291 of the Civil code of the Russian Federation, the association of proprietors of housing accommodation is a nonprofit institution. It does not bear responsibility for non-payment of municipal payments by proprietors of living quarters as members ТСЖ, and those persons who are not those irrespective of, whether the apartment privatised is or not. According to the Housing Code of the Russian Federation it is obliged to supervise only payment of such payments if she is the operating organisation. The law can assign on ТСЖ reception of payments from holders of not privatised apartments and proprietors of the privatised apartments for utilities. Controls TSZH can make bargains which attract consequences of legal character for members ТСЖ, only within the authorities. Bodies TSZH cannot oblige member ТСЖ or other person, the holder or the proprietor of apartment in an apartment house where ТСЖ is the operating organisation, to bear responsibility for the fact that any other holder of apartment in such house does not pay municipal payments. Any bargain concluded in infringement of given position contradicts the law and consequently that is insignificant, that is void irrespective of its recognition court.
If member ТСЖ or any other holder of apartment in an apartment house does not pay the municipal payments which are carried out concerning its personal apartment, ТСЖ, neither its members, nor any other persons who pay ТСЖ for utilities concerning their personal housing accommodation, are not obliged to answer on its debts. The action of debt should be presented by that organisation which delivers the given services. It is "Water canal" or the power supplying organisation. At production before the court ТСЖ, the court recognises as its inadequate claimant as ТСЖ could ask for payment in this case services which it does not grant. If ТСЖ will sue to any holder of apartment (defaulter) on the basis of that it has already paid municipal payments in the complete size for all apartments the court has the right to find out, on what basis ТСЖ has created a situation when individual proprietors of housing accommodation are responsible for debts of other holders of apartments. The court can recognise contracts with the serving organisations void either on the basis of misuse of powers by controls TSZH or owing to the contradiction to the law. Therefore there are two variants of the decision of a problem. First, a presentation of individual claims to defaulters under rules about unjust enrichment. In that case performance of court decisions can be impracticable because of absence of property at debtors. Whereas the state duty sum can constitute from 300 to 1600 roubles on each business depending on the amount in controversy. The second variant is an application of consequences of negligibility of positions of agreements for power supply or other utilities which consisted ТСЖ with the corresponding organisations. Namely, debt repudiation ТСЖ, that is persons who pay for utilities, for the persons, which given utilities do not pay. Or a repudiation for municipal payments in the future for the sum which ТСЖ has unduly paid for defaulters. Even if the court recognises positions of agreements for complete payment ТСЖ of the utilities delivered in apartment houses which they operate (and their further collection upon granting and payment from defaulters ТСЖ), valid that is very improbable, or the agreement parties non-payment ТСЖ of the sums not collected from unfair debtors, that is a difference by the quantity of utilities granted and paid in an individual order will proceed from this, will not be recognised by court (in case of submission of claim by the power supplying organisation) the basis of legal responsibility as according to item 401 of the Civil code of the Russian Federation, the nonprofit institution answers only in the presence of fault. Non-payment by possessors male fide of apartments of payments at their advice and availability of actions ТСЖ for the purpose to induce them to pay municipal payments, will be circumstance excluding fault. Self-defence of the civil rights can assume offset of the sums of unduly paid payments on account of the future payments concerning payment of utilities of diligent payers as a method of return by it of money which they paid for other persons without sufficient legal grounds. The situation which has developed in ТСЖ "Ilichevo", contradicts sense of the law on which ТСЖ forms for the purpose realisations of the rights of the common property on the parts of an apartment house which directly are not belonging to each proprietor, its operation. The sense, which law puts in ТСЖ, does not assume solidary, share, subsidiary either what or other responsibility of one proprietors for the utilities rendered to other holders of apartments in an apartment house. That ТСЖ becomes the operating organisation and collects payments from all persons possessing apartments in corresponding apartment houses, in any way does not do ТСЖ, its members or other diligent payers of municipal payments materially responsible on debts of defaulters. Consider expedient also to consider that tariffs on municipal payments are constituted with allowance for possibilities of their non-payment by some holders of apartments. Therefore the question on current situation change should be put only if the quantity of the raised money for municipal payments is less than sum on fee of the organisations granting utilities, provided by corresponding contracts. In any case, the above-stated arguments can be used for an explanation to the organisations, granting utilities that similar practice of collection of municipal payments cannot take place, so far as concerns a cover of debts of deliberate defaulters of municipal payments for the account of means which should go on repair and service of houses. In any case if ТСЖ will collect municipal payments in an individual order more than on-line will pay under the general contracts with теплоснабжающими and other organisations and it will not be in proportion to a compensation amount for services ТСЖ in the tax of municipal payments as the operating organisation, the given incomes can be recognised as unjust enrichment. Would be expedient to involve the organisations granting utilities to collection of debts on municipal payments if it is connected with the significant legal cost which is not covered with a possible difference of collected municipal payments and payment under contracts for utilities in the centralised order.

_______________________________
From Chairman of board ТСЖ
«Ильичево» Zajakina Valery
Александровича
The claim
At present in Ilyichevsk ТСЖ there was a difficult situation with the fee, rendered to ours ТСЖ. Including, owing to your malicious evasion from payment of municipal payments. The indebtedness total sum constitutes about one million roubles (1002844,00 rbl. on 8.11.2007). The circulation with claims in court does not bring results because of absence at debtors of property on which collection could be paid. Therefore the presentation of individual claims can lead only to an ineffectual loss of time and means. A unique way of the decision of a problem is eviction of deliberate defaulters of a payment for utilities from apartments taken by them. According to item 83 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation the rescissory action of the agreement of social hiring can be presented because of non-payment of municipal payments. According to item 688 ГК the Russian Federation, a consequence of cancellation of such agreement is eviction on a court ground of the decision. The item Item 84 and 90 advance procedure of granting of other living quarters in exchange. Concerning the privatised apartments, according to item 293 ГК the Russian Federation the claim about eviction can be presented at malicious evasion from payment of municipal payments. Long non-payment of municipal payments and use of services of an accomplishment of housing accommodation at the expense of other proprietors of the given apartment houses and other members ТСЖ, is regular infringement of rights and interests of neighbours that is the basis of the beginning of procedure of sale of such living quarters from market places for debt servicing on municipal payments. It is necessary to notice that ТСЖ "Ilichevo" does not put end in itself deprivation of people of housing accommodation belonging to them as the above-stated legal procedures keep enough time to unfair debtors to reset the indebtedness on municipal payments. However, ТСЖ "Ilichevo" has directed corresponding documents to competent authorities on eviction from not privatised apartments and sale from market places of the privatised apartments for debt servicing on municipal payments.
Proceeding from all aforesaid ТСЖ of "Ilichevo" convincingly asks you to reset your indebtedness on municipal payments in order to avoid the legal consequences undesirable to you connected with the above-stated measures.
Chairman of board ТСЖ of "Ilichevo"
Zajakin Valery Aleksandrovich ________________________ date ______

In a judicial plot №143
The claimant: Cheshuin Oleg Germanovich,
P.Shushenskoe, street Taiga, д. 12
The respondent: ФГУ «Sajano-Shushens -
кий timber enterprise », the item Shushensky,
Lenin's street, д. 158.
The amount in controversy: 46 057 roubles

THE STATEMENT OF CLAIM

I, Cheshuin Oleg Germanovich, worked as the driver of car KAMAZ in ФГУ «Sajano-Shushensky timber enterprise». As I have not been taken for work at the enterprise, there was a practice of leasing of the car to private businessmen with me as the driver in the oral form. The salary to me was paid at a rate of 2000 roubles through accounts department, the rest that I earned, I received not through accounts department, and directly from the businessman. Thinking of the next size of the pension, I have required at enterprise administration that to me did charge on the money resources earned by me in the complete form through accounts department. It has caused negative reaction from outside administrations. Me have discharged of work on car KAMAZ. It has been connected by that the administration did not recognise the fact of fulfilment as me of labour responsibilities on the prisoner it to the oral contract with businessman Pestrikovym Н.Ф. On existing practice, from me delivery of the travel order in the end of the working day did not require. However, the administration used it as a formal occasion to qualification of this fact as absenteeism that does not represent the facts. The formulation about dismissal for the absenteeisms, registered in the work record card, I consider illegal. The timber enterprise administration has introduced such formulation to the work record card after I have told that I am going to address to court. Already existing formulation about unsolicited dismissal has been thus changed.
Besides, me independently for personal finances were spare parts on car KAMAZ on which I worked, for a total sum of 31057 roubles are acquired. That is confirmed with receipts on their acquisition. It has been caused by that the employer did not give money for spare parts to me. The administration has refused to refund to me the costs incurred by me. The administration is obliged it to make as it is my property. I claim reimbursement to me of cost belonging to me on the property right of spare parts which the administration has refused to return to me. Thus the fact of installation by me of spare parts on car KAMAZ belonging to the employer it has been recognised in the order on failure in compensation to me their cost.
Also the mental cruelty connected with nervous experiences and aggravation of health has been caused me. I evaluate the mental cruelty in 15000 roubles.
I addressed to the commission on labour disputes of our enterprise. By the first consideration the decision has not been born on the basis of that the administration has not constituted the document on failure in payment of the costs suffered by me. Then, I have repeatedly addressed to the commission on labour disputes to observe a pre-judicial order of the permission of labour disputes, but to me have been orally refused for the reason that at that point in time me have already dismissed from timber enterprise.
Proceeding from all aforesaid, on the basis of item 301, 6 items 2, 151 ГК the Russian Federation, 390 ТК the Russian Federation, item 3 ГПК the Russian Federation, I ask to collect from administration of 31057 roubles as a value of my property which the timber enterprise administration refuses to return, and 15000 roubles as cost of the moral harm caused to me.
I ask to delay also payment of the state duty on the basis of item 333.41 НК the Russian Federation because since September of this year I do not get wages because of the employer.
On the statement of claim are applied:
1) Sale receipts for acquisition of spare parts
2) the Order from 07.11.2006 №104-ЛС
3) the Order from 07.10.2006 № 138-to
4) the Order from 03.10.2006 № 460
5) the Application from 18.10.06
6) the Application from 2.10.2006

The signature ________________________

In a judicial plot №143 on Shushensky area
To justice of the peace Timohinoj Tatyana Timofeevne
The claimant: Association of proprietors of housing accommodation
«Ильичево», the item of Ilichevo, street Moscow, д.13;
Ph. 26-5-41, on behalf of chairman Zajakina
Valery Aleksandrovicha,
The respondent: Shmajlov Sergey Nikolaevich,
Living to the address: the item Ilichevo,
Street Moscow 3-8
The sum of lawsuits: 25554,92 roubles

The statement of claim

Citizen Shmajlov S.N. has got into debt for municipal payments and an accommodation payment on apartment belonging to it about the item of Ilichevo, street Moscow 3-8 concerning ТСЖ "Ilichevo" of 25554,92 roubles (the Debt on an accommodation payment: 3339.97 rbl.; a debt for utilities: 22214,95 rbl.) That is confirmed with the inquiry-calculation on the indebtedness on housing-and-municipal services on Shmajlova S.N. signed by chairman ТСЖ of "Ilichevo" Zajakina V. A. ТСЖ "Ilichevo" has paid Open Society «Yenisei ТГК» the utilities represented in an apartment house where the respondent in the complete size lives. Open Society consent «Yenisei ТГК» as энергоснабжащей the organisations on thermal energy and water granting from outside ТСЖ as subscriber to the respondent as to the subsubscriber is meant according to the appendix to contracts on a heat supply №8001 from 01.07.2002 and on holiday and use economic-potable water №8001-II from 01.07.2002, concluded between the above-stated legal bodies on which the given apartment house is indicated in the demand for granting of utilities as a whole. Therefore an item request 545 ГК the Russian Federation that the subscriber can transmit the energy accepted by it from the power supplying organisation through the attached network, to other person (subsubscriber) only with the consent of the power supplying organisation, it is observed. By implication contracts between ТСЖ and Open Society «Yenisei ТГК» the claimant purchases thermal energy and water by agreement power supply, and also water supply, and delivers to individual holders of apartments, including to the respondent. ТСЖ delivers thermal energy and water to holders of apartments in an apartment house where the claimant under the tariffs lives. That is ТСЖ purchases thermal energy and cold water from Open Society «Yenisei ТГК» and sells holders of apartments, including, to the respondent. There is it within the limits of the power supply and water supply agreement as versions of the contract of purchase in application to supply by thermal energy and water. Therefore between ТСЖ and the respondent rules of the agreement for power supply (water supply), including the item rule operate 540 ГК the Russian Federation that in a case when as the subscriber by agreement power supply the citizen using energy for household consumption acts, the agreement is considered the prisoner from the moment of the first actual connection of the subscriber when due hereunder to the attached network. Therefore the indebtedness of the respondent for thermal energy and water concerning ТСЖ should be considered as default of the agreement for power supply and water supply regarding the responsibility to pay thermal energy received by agreement and water. According to item 547 ГК the Russian Federation in cases of default or inadequate discharge of the obligation by agreement power supply (water supply) the party which has infringed the obligation, is obliged to indemnify the real loss caused to it (item 2 of article 15 ГК the Russian Federation). The real damage in this case is an amount outstanding on payments for thermal energy from outside the respondent as costs which ТСЖ should make for restoration of the infringed right to receive payment for presented thermal energy.
Besides, according to item 210 ГК the Russian Federation the respondent as the proprietor bears the burden of the contents of property belonging to it. Owing to item 290 ГК the Russian Federations, in an apartment house belong to proprietors of apartments on the right of the general common property the general premises the houses bearing designs of the house, mechanical, electric, sanitary-engineering and other equipment outside of or in the apartment, serving more than one apartment. In conformity from item 249 ГК the Russian Federation each participant of the common property is obliged in proportion with the share to participate in tax payment, taxes and other payments under the community property, and also in costs for its contents and preservation. Also, on the basis of item 3 of item 137 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, in case of default by proprietors of premises in an apartment house of the responsibilities on sharing in overhead charges the association of proprietors of housing accommodation has by judicial means the right to require compulsory compensation of obligatory payments and instalments. The respondent did not introduce an accommodation payment in full.
Proceeding from all circumstances set forth above and being guided by the above-stated rules of law and item 131 ГПК the Russian Federation, I ask to collect from respondent Shmajlova S.N. of 25554,92 roubles in favour of ТСЖ "Ilichevo".
On the application are applied:
1) The agreement Attested copy on a heat supply №8001 from 01.07.2002 (two copies)
2) The agreement Attested copy on use economic-potable water №8001-II from 01.07.2002 (two copies)
3) The Inquiry-account on the indebtedness on housing-and-municipal services on Shmajlov S.N. (two copies)
4) The Demand for economic-drinking water supply on apartment houses ТСЖ of "Ilichevo" for the agreement on economic potable water (two copies)
5) The Demand on hot water supply on apartment houses ТСЖ of "Ilichevo" for the agreement on a heat supply (two copies)
6) The Demand for heating on apartment houses ТСЖ of "Ilichevo" for the agreement on a heat supply (two copies)
7) The Power of attorney of the representative from 11.11.2007
8) The Contract of agency from 08.11.2007
9) The Petition for reclamation of proofs.
10) The Document on state duty payment.

Chairman ТСЖ of "Ilichevo"
Zajakin Valery Aleksandrovich ________________________ date ______

In a judicial plot №143по to Shushensky area
To world judge Timohinoj Tatyana Timofeevne
The claimant: Associations of proprietors of housing accommodation
«Ильичево», the item of Ilichevo, street Moscow, д.13;
Ph. 26-5-41, on behalf of chairman Zajakina
Valery Aleksandrovicha,
The respondent: Gerdun Lyudmila Vasilevna,
Living to the address: the item Ilichevo,
Street Spring 7-24
The sum of actions: 22332.68 roubles

The statement of claim

Citizen Gerdun L.V. has run into debt for municipal payments and an accommodation payment on apartment belonging to it about the item of Ilichevo, street Spring 7-24 concerning ТСЖ "Ilichevo" of 22332.68 roubles. (A debt on an accommodation payment: 14079.30 rbl.; a debt for utilities: 8253.38 rbl.) That is confirmed with the inquiry-calculation on the indebtedness on housing-and-municipal services on Gerdun L.V. signed by chairman ТСЖ of "Ilichevo" Zajakina V. A. ТСЖ "Ilichevo" has paid Open Society «Yenisei ТГК» the utilities represented in an apartment house where the respondent in the complete size lives. Open Society consent «Yenisei ТГК» as энергоснабжащей the organisations on thermal energy and water granting from outside ТСЖ as subscriber to the respondent as to the subsubscriber is meant according to the appendix to contracts on a heat supply №8001 from 01.07.2002 and on holiday and use economic-potable water №8001-II from 01.07.2002, concluded between the above-stated legal bodies on which the given apartment house is indicated in the demand for granting of utilities as a whole. Therefore an item request 545 ГК the Russian Federation that the subscriber can transmit the energy accepted by it from the power supplying organisation through the attached network, to other person (subsubscriber) only with the consent of the power supplying organisation, it is observed. By implication contracts between ТСЖ and Open Society «Yenisei ТГК» the claimant purchases thermal energy and water under the power supply agreement, and also water supply, and delivers individual holders of apartments, including to the respondent. ТСЖ delivers thermal energy and water to holders of apartments in an apartment house where the claimant under the tariffs lives. That is ТСЖ purchases thermal energy and cold water from Open Society «Yenisei ТГК» and sells holders of apartments, including, the respondent. There is it within the limits of the power supply and water supply agreement as versions of the contract of purchase in application to supply by thermal energy and water. Therefore between ТСЖ and ответчицой rules of the agreement for power supply (water supply), including an item rule act 540 ГК the Russian Federation that in a case when as the subscriber under the power supply agreement the citizen using energy for household consumption acts, the agreement is considered the prisoner from the moment of the first actual connection of the subscriber when due hereunder to the attached network. Therefore the indebtedness of the respondent for thermal energy and water concerning ТСЖ should be considered as default of the agreement for power supply and water supply regarding the responsibility to pay thermal energy received under the agreement and water. According to item 547 ГК the Russian Federation in cases of default or inadequate discharge of the obligation by agreement power supply (water supply) the party which has infringed the obligation, is obliged to indemnify the real loss caused to it (item 2 of article 15 ГК the Russian Federation). The real damage in this case is an amount outstanding on payments for thermal energy from outside respondents as costs which ТСЖ should make for restoration of the infringed right to receive payment for presented thermal energy.
Besides, according to item 210 ГК the Russian Federation the respondent as the proprietor bears the burden of the contents of property belonging to it. Owing to item 290 ГК the Russian Federations, in an apartment house belong to proprietors of apartments on the right of the general common property the general premises the houses bearing designs of the house, mechanical, electric, sanitary-engineering and other equipment outside of or in the apartment, serving more than one apartment. In conformity from item 249 ГК the Russian Federation each participant of the common property is obliged in proportion with the share to participate in tax payment, taxes and other payments under the community property, and also in costs for its contents and preservation. Also, on the basis of item 3 of item 137 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, in case of default by proprietors of premises in an apartment house of the responsibilities on sharing in overhead charges the association of proprietors of housing accommodation has by judicial means the right to require compulsory compensation of obligatory payments and instalments. The respondent did not introduce an accommodation payment in full.
Proceeding from all circumstances set forth above and being guided by the above-stated rules of law and item 131 ГПК the Russian Federation, I ask to collect from respondent Gerdun L.V. of 22332.68 roubles in favour of ТСЖ "Ilichevo".
On the application are applied:
1) The agreement Attested copy on a heat supply №8001 from 01.07.2002 (two copies)
2) The agreement Attested copy on use economic-potable water №8001-II from 01.07.2002 (two copies)
3) The Inquiry-account on the indebtedness on housing-and-municipal services on Gerdun L.V. (two copies)
4) The Demand for economic-drinking water supply on apartment houses ТСЖ of "Ilichevo" for the agreement on economic potable water (two copies)
5) The Demand on hot water supply on apartment houses ТСЖ of "Ilichevo" for the agreement on a heat supply (two copies)
6) The Demand for heating on apartment houses ТСЖ of "Ilichevo" for the agreement on a heat supply (two copies)
7) The Power of attorney of the representative from 11.11.2007
8) The Contract of agency from 08.11.2007
9) The Petition for reclamation of proofs.
10) The Petition for association of businesses.
11) The Document on state duty payment.

Chairman ТСЖ of "Ilichevo"
Zajakin Valery Aleksandrovich ________________________ date ______

In Arbitration court of Krasnoyarsk region
The claimant: Open Society «Shushensky transportno -
Repair shop », 662713,
The item Shushensky, street May Day, д. 58,
Bodies. (39139 31346.
E-mail: max231979@rambler.ru
The respondent: Joint-Stock Company "Field", with. Казанцево, street
Victories, д.1 an INN 2442001156 East -
The Siberian bank р/с 40206810300000310021,
Ph. 8 (39139) бух. 28-5-74, дир. 28-5-44

THE STATEMENT OF CLAIM

In October, 2002 of Open Society «Shushensky ТРП» has concluded from Joint-Stock Company "Field" the agreement on fulfilment of transportation services. In the agreement the underestimated accounting on payment has been mortgaged. It took place because Joint-Stock Company "Field" is the holder of shares of Open Society of 5 % «Shushensky ТРП» and has the representative in Open Society Board of directors «Shushensky ТРП». The order indicated in item 83 ФЗ «On joint-stock companies» №208 from December, 26th, 1995 has not been observed. As a result the claimant has sustained losses in the sum of 92 159 roubles as a difference between the accounting which is coming under to application agrees item 3 of item 424 ГК the Russian Federation and 84 ФЗ «On joint-stock companies» №208 from December, 26th, 1995, and considered by the respondent.
Thereof proceeding from item 15 item, 1080, гл. 39, 40, 59 ГК the Russian Federation, item 83, 84 ФЗ «On joint-stock companies» №208 from December, 26th, 1995, the item of item 4 of agrarian and industrial complex of the Russian Federation:
I ask to oblige the respondent to reimburse damnified at a rate of 92 159 (ninety two thousand hundred fifty nine) roubles.
Being guided by also the item of item 90-92 of agrarian and industrial complex of the Russian Federation I ask to accept обеспечительные measures under the claim, namely:
To seize money resources or other property, belonging to the respondent and being at them and at other persons. In particular, on monetary accounts of Joint-Stock Company "Field" р/с 40206810300000310021, the East Siberian bank. As the respondent can take measures to concealment of the property.
I ask to delay also on the basis of item 4 of item 102 of agrarian and industrial complex of the Russian Federation State Tax payment on business in connection with the heavy property status of the claimant caused in many respects by actions of the respondent.
The list of documents, enclosed on the claim:
1) The Agreement from October, 2002
2) Accounting
3) The Certificate from 01.05.2003
4) The Claim from 05.05.2003
5) the inquiry from 10.10.2003 № 03-4287
6) the inquiry from 25.09.2003 № 11-1/3728
7) the inquiry from 29.09.03 № 03/4079

The general director of Open Society «Shushensky ТРП»
Panasenko Nikolay Vasilevich ____________ (23.10.2003.)

In arbitration court of Krasnoyarsk region
The claimant: ТСЖ "Ilichevo"
The respondent: Ilichevsky
Village council

The statement of claim
The Ilichevsky village council unreasonably interfered with activity ТСЖ of "Ilichevo", namely: has illegally lowered rates of consumption of thermal energy for holders of the apartments served ТСЖ, has not approved increase of tariffs by general meeting of proprietors of apartments, members ТСЖ twice. That is has caused the loss in the form of the loss of profit as not received incomes (a difference in municipal payments which should take place under the law, and really taking place) which ТСЖ would receive at civil circulation regular courses of business if granted right ТСЖ would not be infringed. (Item 15 ГК the Russian Federation).
In this connection I ask: to collect from Ilichevsky village council a difference between the payments put under the law for utilities and really taking place payments for consumed thermal energy.

Chairman ТСЖ of "Ilichevo"
Zajakin Valery Aleksandrovich ______________________________

In Arbitration court of Krasnoyarsk region
The claimant: Open Society «Shushensky transportno -
Repair shop », 662713,
The item Shushensky, street May Day, д. 58,
Bodies. (39139 31346.
E-mail: max231979@rambler.ru
The respondent: 1) Zaharchuk Sergey Trofimovich,
Lesosibirsk, 5th мкр., д. 14, sq. 14.
Ph. ______________;
Co-defendants: 2) INN Open Society "Gay TH"
2454002193, Lesosibirsk, the lane River,
д. 7., р/с 40702810500040000023 LF ЛИКЦ
«Enesejsky incorporated bank»;
3) Open Company "Расалка" of an INN 2463049737,
Krasnoyarsk., avenue Free 53А., р/с
40702810700030000268 АИКБ «Enesejsky
Incorporated bank », director Merkulov
Alexey Anatolevich, Krasnoyarsk,
Street of the Constitution 23-47, ph. 26-56-41,
Believed Kress Victor Jurevich,
Krasnoyarsk, street Take-off sq. 26-52.,
Ph. 29-71-07.;
4) state of emergency Matorko Vladimir Viktorovich,
Minusinsk, Pushkin's street, 176.
The certificate № 8626 from 11.07.2000.

THE STATEMENT OF CLAIM

Respondent Zaharchuk S.T. is the holder of 21 % of voting shares of joint-stock company. Using a heavy financial position of the enterprise, the respondent has forced a joint-stock company executive office to bargain, connected with alienation of the property exceeding 25 % of a book value of property of joint-stock company. From its party threat to affect a course of an annual meeting of shareholders constantly sounded, to choose the new general director and to receive the share fraction in the natural form in any method. In a case of fulfilment of the conditions it обещял the big profits on carriage wood in the north of our region. Thus it, having deceived labour collective which possesses share majority of the claimant, has gained the majority vote at an annual meeting of shareholders from communication with elections of the general director.
As a result of 8 cars KAMAZ with trailers it has been transmitted to Open Company "Расалка" use, and in a consequence and Open Society "Gay TH" which general director is the respondent. A property part it has been damaged to a worthlessness condition, a part it is kept for Open Society "Gay TH" as sold, and two cars are transmitted by the respondent of state of emergency Motorko V.V. Property передовалось from hand to hand the respondent disregarding opinion of joint-stock company. All bargains were made out subsequently with imposing of decisions of the respondent of the shareholder concerning Open Society.
In favour of Open Society «Shushensky ТРП» payment in the beginning of the given legal relation for the purpose has been made to force a management to extend use of property only in size approximately 30000 roubles. In a consequence payment was not made. As have shown the further events, the initial user of property had no means: an authorised capital stock or floating assets to pay the given bargain though the respondent represented them as reliable and well-founded business partners. Court ushers have returned the court order for the sum of 238 080 roubles in connection with absence at Open Company "Расалка" of any incomes or property. The respondent by agreement the claimant with Open Society "Gay TH" which is its affiliated person, also has not settled up. For the damaged property indemnification is not granted. Account for the remained property both sold, and rented is not made despite recovery of claims in written form.
To obtain on demand other lost property of the claimant, except damaged as being in wrongful possession it is not obviously possible as its real site is not known, and the firms presented by the respondent have no property and incomes for loss set-off.
Thus, because of the respondent the order of the conclusion of high finances with interested persons concerning the joint-stock company property, provided by the federal legislation, has not been observed. That has entailed for company a damage in the sum of 1220213 roubles and has even more aggravated financial circumstances of the claimant.
Even applying general principles of justice and analogy of the right, and addressing to the maximum moral authority of all civilised countries applied along with ordinary elements of law in set of legislative systems, namely Bibles. We can see that the respondent in this case should reimburse cost damaged to a condition of worthlessness of property and a rent (the Outcome 22: 14-15).

Thereof proceeding from the item of item 6 of item 2, 15, 1080, гл. 34, 59 ГК the Russian Federation, item 84 ФЗ «On joint-stock companies» №208 from December, 26th, 1995, item 4 item, 33 agrarian and industrial complexes of the Russian Federation:
I ask to oblige the respondent to pay damages caused by it as the shareholder, abused the rights to the detriment of to other holders and the joint-stock company, at a rate of 1220213 (one million two hundred twenty thousand two hundred thirteen) roubles and also to involve in compensation of a damage of its co-defendants as jointly liable.
Account of the sum of requests:
Rent: Agreement requisites The Scale of rent for one car KAMAZ in a month (руб.) Quantity of months Quantity of cars All the sum by agreement
(Rbl.)
From Open Company "Расалка" from 22.12.2000 2300 3 8 55200
From Open Company "Расалка" from 01.04.2001 3720 18 8 535680
From Open Society "Gay TH" from 22.08.2002 1200 8 7 67200

From Motorko V.V. state of emergency 2400 6 2 28800
Total 686880
The note: as terms and conditions of contract from Motorko V.V. state of emergency do not allow to advance a real scale of rent the Russian Federation comes under to application of item 424 of item 3 ГК. Thus, the rental constitutes: 2400 roubles = ((3720 + 2300 + 1200): 3).
Indemnification for the lost property (to obtain on demand it at present as being in wrongful use it is not obviously possible as its site is not known, and the firms presented by the respondent have no property and incomes for loss set-off):
Applying item 424 of item 3 ГК the Russian Federation, and using an estimation of 3 cars KAMAZ by agreement purchase and sale from 28.06.2003 №9 between Open Society «Shushensky ТРП» and Open Society "Gay TH", 200000 rbl. x 8: 3 = 533 333 rbl.
In total amount in controversy 533 333 + 686 880 = 1220213 rbl.
The note: sum already paid under contracts more than is covered with the sum of percent which rely to the claimant to payment within the limits of the existing obligation agrees item 395 ГК the Russian Federation.
The pretenzionnyj order is observed by Open Company "Расалка" submission of claim on which is awarded for payment 238 080. On what shareholder Zaharchuk S.T. is informed in connection with its concern in the business on the party of the respondent, dispatch of certified mails with claims on a neopayment of lease to Zaharchuka S.T. as directors of Open Society "Gay TH" (on юр. Open Society address) from 18.08.03 and 25.08.03. Its personal notice from 28.06.2003 about what there is a receipt. The cable to Matorko V.V. from 04.08.03., and also its personal notification from 05. 08. 2003 about what there is its receipt. Besides, certified mails with claims on a neopayment of lease from 18.09.03 and 17.10.03. And also other exhaustive methods excluding any hope of payment and return of lost property. Being guided by also the item of item 90-92 of agrarian and industrial complex of the Russian Federation I ask to accept обеспечительные measures under the claim, namely:
1) to impose arrest on money resources or other property, belonging to respondents and being at them and at other persons, in particular founders of the data юр. Persons. In particular, on monetary accounts of Open Company "Расалка", р/с 40702810700030000268 АИКБ «Enesejsky incorporated bank», Open Society "Gay TH", р/с 40702810500040000023 LF ЛИКЦ «Enesejsky incorporated bank». As well on property of the given legal bodies. Besides it on property of the director of Open Company "Расалка" Merkulova A.A. and its believed Kress V. JU who was Zaharchuk СТ as the property declared in an authorised capital stock of Open Company "Расалка" and Open Society "Gay TH" and also утеренное the claimant the property and incomes can be in their personal possession that can entail presentation of the corresponding claim proceeding from an outcome of the given statement of claim or to affect results of final process. Besides, on property of their spouses, parents, children, full and half-brothers and sisters, adoptive fathers and adopted and (or) their affiliated persons who are beneficiaries under present bargains on alienation of property of the claimant, entailed damaging event. Namely holders of Open Company "Расалка" and Open Society "Gay TH", property of the constituent capital which is in their personal possession. As, according to item 81 item, 84 ФЗ «On joint-stock companies» №208 from December, 26th, 1995, they are financially interested persons on the given case in connection with a material tresspass to the claimant. Also can be subsequently involved in a concern in the business as third persons. Or as respondents at availability at them the status of the individual businessman. The decision of a question on expediency of the given measure already during preparation of business for trial, the claimant keeps at the discretion of arbitration court.
2) to Forbid the set forth above and other persons to alienate property of the claimant:
(7 cars KAMAZ 55102: н. 25-47 КЭП the engine №188047 chassis №222635, 28-65 КЭС the engine №786503 chassis №385398, 65-46 КЭН the engine №693856 chassis №6032, 25-46 КЭП the engine №818022 chassis №222815, 53-43 КЭТ the engine №297249 chassis №313074, 53-45 КЭТ the engine №109691 chassis №0313061, 49-76 КЭТ the engine №203598 chassis №296514; trailers: № 74-08 ЦХ the chassis №783, №98-50 КЯ the chassis №00341182, №45-24 КЯ the chassis №05596, №17-28ЦЦ the chassis №864, №98-41КЯ the chassis №0014520, №29-06КЯ the chassis №5583, №45-79КЯ the chassis №13734).
3) And also to transmit the above-stated disputable property, that is cars on storage to the claimant. Given обеспечительные measures are necessary because the respondent and third persons initially operated to the detriment of to the claimant, and can try to hide incomes and the property received for an abacus of the claimant. I ask to delay also on the basis of item 4 of item 102 of agrarian and industrial complex of the Russian Federation State Tax payment on business in connection with a heavy property status of the claimant, caused in many respects actions of respondents.
Significant part of proofs on the given case, in particular about the property right to cars, it is possible to find in business №А33-8857/01-С2 under Open Society claim «Shushensky ТРП» to Open Company "Расалка" about collection 238 080 rbl. and in other arbitration businesses connected with the given obligation.
The list of the enc:
1) copies of the certificate on the state registration of Open Society «Shushensky ТРП» as the legal person
2) the inquiry from 21.10.03.
3) the power of attorney from 21.10.03
4) the statement from the shareholder register
5) the order №86/I-k
6) the statement from 22.12.2000.
7) the power of attorney from 07.12.2000.
8) the agreement from 22.12.2000.
9) the agreement from 01.04.2001.
10) the agreement from 22.08.2002 №47.
11) the agreement from 28.06.2003 № 9
12) the appendix №1 to the agreement from 28.06.2003 № 9
13) the reception-transfer certificate by agreement from 28.06.2003 № 9
14) the invoice № 31 from 15.08.03
15) the invoice № 32 from 15.08.03
16) accounting №7 from 15.09.03
17) the inspection certificate from 05.09.03
18) the receipt from 16.09.03
19) the licence from 04.06.03
20) the court order from 17.12.01 №078755
21) account from 22.08.03
22) the certificate from 01.01.2002
23) definition from 22.11.02
24) the certificate of investigation from 05.04.2001
25) the message from 13.06.02 №09-1494
26) the receipt from 28.06.2003
27) the claim from 18.09.03 from Panasenko N.V.
28) the claim from 18.09.03 from Blohina S.A.
29) the claim from 30.09.03 from Panasenko N.V.
30) the claim from 30.09.03 from Blohina S.A.
31) the agreement from 10.03.2003 №1
32) the agreement from 10.03.2003 №2
33) the agreement from 10.03.2003 №3
34) the agreement from 01.05.2003 №1
35) the agreement from 01.05.2003 №2
36) the invoice from 15.09.03 №345
37) the receipt from 15.09.03
38) the receipt from 05.08.2003
39) the inquiry from 06.07.2003
40) the cable from 04.08.2003
41) the advice from 18.08.03
42) the advice from 25.08.03
43) the receipt 18.09.03
44) the receipt 17.10.03
45) the inquiry from 10.10.2003 № 03-4287
46) the inquiry from 25.09.2003 № 11-1/3728
47) the inquiry from 29.09.03 № 03/4079
48) the inquiry from 12.08.2002 from РЭГ traffic police

The general director of Open Society
«Shushensky ТРП»
Panasenko Nikolay Vasilevich ____________________

21.10.03

In Krasnoyarsk regional court
The victim: Butakov A.F.,
The item Shushensky, Chekhov's lane, д.2
The defendant: Marchenko V. A,
S.Kazantsevo Shushensky
Area, street Krupsky 27-2

THE APPEAL FOR REVIEW ON THE COURT SENTENCE ON BUSINESS № 1-282/2006

On November, 29th, 2006 Marchenko V. A is recognised by guilty of fulfilment of theft and is condemned under item 158 ч. 2 criminal codes of Russian Federation. The punitive measure to the defendant under the court sentence has constituted 1 year of 6 months conditionally. With the sentence of court I do not agree on following motives.
I, Butakov A.F. who has sustained from actions of the defendant of Marchenko V. A am forced to declare that the court in the sentence on business №1-282/2006 about theft at me hay to defendants has unreasonably given preference to witnesses for the defence and has incorrectly established facts of the case. The matter is that I have prepared hay on a plot belonging to me at a rate of 5 зародов on 20 centners each. It is established by court on the basis of charge testimonies of witnesses. Any копен on 590 kg I did not prepare. Whereas the court has wrongly taken into consideration indications of the defendant and witnesses for the defence that they have removed hay at a rate of 3 копен on 590 kg each instead of 4 зародов on 20 centners each which were gone at me as a result of Marchenko V. A's criminal acts. At the same time, the court has drawn an unreasonable conclusion that the defendant has stolen at me 3 shocks, instead of 4 зарода whereas копен I did not prepare. The court also has unreasonably advanced that other hay someone has stolen other, instead of Marchenko V. A. Whereas it is impossible owing to that according to facts of the case by the time of exportation was in the field of 5 units of warehousing of hay, and after exportation there was one. As corresponds a charge item that has been removed by the defendant 4 зарода. The court also has not considered that originally Gartvih E.A., the worker Marchenko V. O, has given evidences that has been removed four units of hay: two dragging, and two have loaded in арбу and the trailer and have removed.
Also court at the decision of a question on, whether арба by Marchenko has been loaded completely or not at realisation of investigatory experiment in the presence of contradictions between charge and protection arguments has unreasonably preferred testimonies of witnesses of protection which participated in exportation of mine Marchenko V. A's hay though the court has not considered that fact that even if their fault is not established, their indications should be exposed большему to doubt, than my indications and charge testimonies of witnesses as they, nevertheless, participated in exportation of hay and depend on the defendant as its workers or are connected with it the general economic interests. Witness Kozhura N.I. indicated that the defendant Marchenko V. O has asked for it арбу for investigatory experiment which included 5,9 centners whereas in personal арбу Marchenko in which it and removed my hay, enters according to the witness Djatlova V. E enters to 40 centners. However the court has not considered it. I have not been informed on investigatory experiment realisation.
Besides it, witness Gartvih E.A. and Konev I.P. give various evidences on time вывозки hay. Гартвих has given evidences that hay has been removed for two or three months (that says that hay has been removed in great volumes, than it is established by court), and Konev has given evidences that hay have removed for one day.
Besides, the court has incorrectly applied statutory provisions about account of the size of a direct valid damage. In erroneous opinion of court account of a direct valid damage should be made at the price of 250 roubles for centner which was at the moment of theft of my hay by defendant by autumn of 2005. At the same time, according to item 15 ГК the Russian Federation a direct valid damage it those costs which I should make for restoration of the infringed right. I have learnt about losses of hay in the end of March, 2006, and from this point on for restoration of my infringed right I should purchase hay in quantity which was stolen at me by Marchenko, at the price of 400-500 roubles for centner. To take measures on restoration of my infringed right in the autumn I could not, as I did not know about plunder of my hay. Therefore the autumn prices of 2005 in account cannot be accepted, as I could not then to take measures on restoration of my infringed right and to purchase similar quantity of hay on 250 roubles centner for compensation of my loss of property as a result of Marchenko's criminal acts. Therefore compensation at the price of 400-500 roubles for centner it not the loss of profit as wrongly believes court, and just a direct valid damage. Thus, the direct valid damage should be advanced by multiplication of quantity of Marchenko of hay stolen at me to its cost to spring of 2006.
Bias of a consequence is caused by that brother Marchenko V.O.Marchenko Л.О. Works in administration of Krasnoyarsk region in a department which just and should monitor legitimacy on the edge south. It also has pressed a consequence.
Proceeding from all aforesaid and being based on corresponding statutory provisions, I ask to change the sentence regarding definition of the size caused to me a crime of a damage and to recognise it in volume 4 зародов on 20 centners each at the price of 400 roubles for centner.
On the appeal for review it is applied:
1) The Inquiry
2) The Sentence
3) The Receipt
Butakov A.F. ________________

In Office of Public Prosecutor Shushensky
Area of Krasnoyarsk region
________________________
From Chairman ТСЖ
«Ильичево» Zajakina V. A.

Explanation

On the questions set to you I regard necessary to explain the following. Tariff ТСЖ of "Ilichevo" it is valid above Open Society tariff «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК 13)», presented by it for utilities of giving of thermal energy. It is connected by that we ТСЖ is the intermediary on thermal energy resale between Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК 13)» and holders of apartments in houses served by us. The difference in tariffs goes on fee of bank, our accounts department and other overhead charge connected with resale of thermal energy to holders of apartments in which relation we are the serving organisation. The economy goes on housing accommodation repair as service ТСЖ and the contents in a certain insignificant part of workers ТСЖ. The last is connected by that illegal requests of administration of Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК 13)» about redemption of a debt on municipal payments of the persons who are not members ТСЖ, at the expense of members ТСЖ of diligent payers has led to that the accommodation payment goes on financing of a debt of deliberate defaulters on municipal payments. All it takes place when under legislative guidelines ТСЖ does not bear the liability for debts even those persons who are members ТСЖ, including on debts for utilities. In itself statement of a question on a difference of tariffs is inappropriate also because the similar difference was generated in a necessity consequence to finance a debt of defaulters. Agreement №8001 positions between Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК 13)» and ТСЖ "Ilichevo" that we ТСЖ bears responsibility at a rate of 100 % for consumed by holders of apartments thermal energy irrespective of fault most ТСЖ, and by force-majeur rules (bears civil responsibility irrespective of, whether third persons, the subsubscribers consuming thermal energy or not) have settled up with it, is to contradicting rules of the Civil code of the Russian Federation about the public agreement, that is infringes upon the anti-trust legislation as a particular covenant which is not applied to all consumers of thermal energy. Therefore the given position of agreement №8001 is insignificant and is void irrespective of a recognition that court. Even if tariffs ТСЖ for resold utilities of a heat supply there are more than overhead charge most ТСЖ and среднерыночного the size of profitability, this money goes on repair of housing accommodation and granting of housing services in those the house in which relation we ТСЖ is the serving organisation. Therefore any no-purpose expenditure of means received from members ТСЖ is not present.

Chairman ТСЖ of "Ilichevo"
Zajakin Valery Aleksandrovich ______________________________

In Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)»From ТСЖ "Ilichevo", ShushenskyArea, the item Ilichevo, Street Moscow, д.13The claimOn circumstances of making contract of power supply between ТСЖ "Ilichevo" and Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)» means the below-mentioned. Owing to article 422 ГК the Russian Federation about an agreement and law parity to be said that the agreement should correspond to obligatory rules for the parties, statutory and other legal acts (mandatory provisions) acting at the moment of its conclusion. In force article 426 ГК the Russian Federation about definition of concept of the public agreement by the public agreement admits the agreement concluded by the commercial organisation and establishing its responsibilities on sale of the goods, to fulfilment of works or rendering of services which such organisation on character of the activity should carry out concerning everyone who to it will address (a home shopping service, carriage by a common carrier, a telecommunication service, power supply, medical, hotel service, etc.) . The commercial organisation has not the right to give preference to one person before another concerning the conclusion of the public agreement, except cases, statutory and other legal acts. According to the agreement between ТСЖ "Ilichevo" and Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)» increased responsibility ТСЖ, except for circumstances of force-majeur, that is force majeure circumstances, and the responsibility to pay all delivered energy and water, including is established by that who does not consist in ТСЖ. ТСЖ "Ilichevo" is a non-profit organisation, therefore to it, as the same conditions should be applied to house owners of physical persons, that is those terms and conditions of contract of power supply which are advanced in the Civil code of the Russian Federation. Open Societies «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)» have been infringed rules of the public agreement for equality of customers (consumers) that has entailed a damage for ТСЖ at a rate of 1002844,00 rbl. (On 8.11.2007) as the money paid ТСЖ for deliberate defaulters of municipal payments for an abacus of diligent members ТСЖ of "Ilichevo". The given losses are liable owing to article 15 ГК the Russian Federation according to which the person which right is infringed, can require the full indemnification of the losses caused to it if the law or the agreement do not provide repairing a loss in the smaller size. And also, losses are understood as costs which the person, whose right is infringed, has made or should make for restoration of the infringed right, loss or damage of its property (a real damage), and also not received incomes which this person would receive at civil circulation regular courses of business if its right has not been infringed (loss of profit). Performance of given agreement ТСЖ causes a damage from outside Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)».I ask Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)» voluntary to pay or зачесть on account of the future payments 1002844,00 rbl. in favour of ТСЖ "Ilichevo". Otherwise, ТСЖ will address to arbitration court for protection of the rights.

In Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)»
From ТСЖ "Ilichevo", Shushensky
Area, the item Ilichevo,
Street Moscow, д.13

The offer on settlement of contractual relations

Making a proposal about settlement of contractual relations ТСЖ of "Ilichevo" starts with the below-mentioned:
1. The Explanation concerning responsibility of association of proprietors of housing accommodation on municipal payments, for the services represented in houses in which relation ТСЖ carries out functions of the operating organisation.
According to item 291 of the Civil code of the Russian Federation, the association of proprietors of housing accommodation is a nonprofit institution. It does not bear responsibility for non-payment of municipal payments by proprietors of living quarters as members ТСЖ, and those persons who are not those irrespective of, whether the apartment privatised is or not. According to the Housing Code of the Russian Federation it is obliged to supervise only payment of such payments if she is the operating organisation. The law can assign on ТСЖ reception of payments from holders of not privatised apartments and proprietors of the privatised apartments for utilities. Controls TSZH can make bargains which attract consequences of legal character for members ТСЖ, only within the authorities. Bodies TSZH cannot oblige member ТСЖ or other person, the holder or the proprietor of apartment in an apartment house where ТСЖ is the operating organisation, to bear responsibility for the fact that any other holder of apartment in such house does not pay municipal payments. Any bargain concluded in infringement of given position contradicts the law and consequently that is insignificant, that is void irrespective of its recognition court.
If member ТСЖ or any other holder of apartment in an apartment house does not pay the municipal payments which are carried out concerning its personal apartment, ТСЖ, neither its members, nor any other persons who pay ТСЖ for utilities concerning their personal housing accommodation, are not obliged to answer on its debts. The action of debt should be presented by that organisation which delivers the given services. These are the power supplying organisations. At production before the court ТСЖ, the court recognises as its inadequate claimant as ТСЖ could ask for payment in this case services which it does not grant. If ТСЖ will sue to any holder of apartment (defaulter) on the basis of that it has already paid municipal payments in the complete size for all apartments the court has the right to find out, on what basis ТСЖ has created a situation when individual proprietors of housing accommodation are responsible for debts of other holders of apartments. The court can recognise contracts with the serving organisations void either on the basis of misuse of powers by controls TSZH or owing to the contradiction to the law. Therefore there are two variants of the decision of a problem. First, a presentation of individual claims to defaulters under rules about unjust enrichment. In that case performance of court decisions can be impracticable because of absence of property at debtors. Whereas the state duty sum can constitute from 300 to 1600 roubles on each business depending on the amount in controversy. Quantity of debtors some tens. The second variant is an application of consequences of negligibility of positions of agreements for power supply or other utilities which consisted ТСЖ with the corresponding organisations. Namely, debt repudiation ТСЖ, that is persons who pay for utilities, for the persons, which given utilities do not pay. Or a repudiation for municipal payments in the future for the sum which ТСЖ has unduly paid for defaulters. Even if the court recognises positions of agreements for complete payment ТСЖ of the utilities delivered in apartment houses which they operate (and their further collection upon granting and payment from defaulters ТСЖ), valid that is very improbable, or the agreement parties non-payment ТСЖ of the sums not collected from unfair debtors, that is a difference by the quantity of utilities granted and paid in an individual order will proceed from this, will not be recognised by court (in case of submission of claim by the power supplying organisation) the basis of legal responsibility as according to item 401 of the Civil code of the Russian Federation, the nonprofit institution answers only in the presence of fault. Positions of contracts with power supplying organisations about responsibility ТСЖ in all cases of default of obligations except for in what it was a consequence of force majeure circumstances, will be recognised by court by void as ТСЖ has no authorised capital stock, and speech can go only about the increased responsibility of proprietors of housing accommodation, members ТСЖ. That certainly cannot take place, as the given persons did not participate in the bargain. The law does not provide availability of similar authorities at controls TSZH. The given position of contracts with power supplying organisations is insignificant as contradicts the law, namely to rules of civil procedure law that actions of third persons can create legal consequences for the citizen only in the presence of its will in a proper legal form. Legal consequences of the above-stated positions of contracts not corresponding to the law is compulsory imposing on proprietors of housing accommodation and other payers of obligatory payments of the responsibility is solidary and субсидиарно to be responsible for non-payment of municipal payments by other holders of apartments. This consequence of that ТСЖ has no what or means, except what receives from holders of apartments on quite definite purposes connected with operation of apartment houses. Non-payment by possessors male fide of apartments of payments at their advice and availability of actions ТСЖ for the purpose to induce them to pay municipal payments, will be circumstance excluding fault. Self-defence of the civil rights can assume offset of the sums of unduly paid payments on account of the future payments concerning payment of utilities of diligent payers as a method of return by it of money which they paid for other persons without sufficient legal grounds. The situation which has developed in ТСЖ "Ilichevo", contradicts sense of the law on which ТСЖ forms for the purpose realisations of the rights of the common property on the parts of an apartment house which directly are not belonging to each proprietor, its operation. The sense, which law puts in ТСЖ, does not assume solidary, share, subsidiary either what or other responsibility of one proprietors for the utilities rendered to other holders of apartments in an apartment house. That ТСЖ becomes the operating organisation and collects payments from all persons possessing apartments in corresponding apartment houses, in any way does not do ТСЖ, its members or other diligent payers of municipal payments materially responsible on debts of defaulters. Consider expedient also to consider that tariffs on municipal payments are constituted with allowance for possibilities of their non-payment by some holders of apartments. Therefore the question on current situation change should be put only if the quantity of the raised money for municipal payments is less than sum on fee of the organisations granting utilities, provided by corresponding contracts. In any case, the above-stated arguments can be used for an explanation to the organisations, granting utilities that similar practice of collection of municipal payments cannot take place, so far as concerns a cover of debts of deliberate defaulters of municipal payments for the account of means which should go on repair and service of houses. Also it is necessary to consider that if ТСЖ will collect municipal payments in an individual order more than on-line will pay under the general contracts with теплоснабжающими and other organisations and it will not be in proportion to a compensation amount for services ТСЖ in the tax of municipal payments as the operating organisation, the given incomes can be recognised as unjust enrichment. Would be expedient to involve the organisations granting utilities to collection of debts on municipal payments if it is connected with the significant legal cost which is not covered with a possible difference of collected municipal payments and payment under contracts for utilities in the centralised order.

2. The Situation which has developed owing to interference of Ilichevsky rural administration in activity ТСЖ by "Ilichevo".

At present, interference of Ilichevsky rural administration in procedure of formation of tariffs ТСЖ of "Ilichevo" on utilities has led to that ТСЖ has no possibility to cover arrears on municipal payments for the revenue account on municipal payments as the difference between tariffs most ТСЖ and Open Society tariffs «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13) has considerably decreased. The arrears cover on municipal payments for the account of fee most ТСЖ on operation of apartment houses cannot be lawful from the point of view of maintenance of interests of possessors bona fide of apartments in houses in which relation ТСЖ is the operating organisation. Therefore legal and monetary relations with suppliers of utilities cannot remain former. It is necessary to consider also that at present in Ilyichevsk ТСЖ there was a difficult situation with the fee, rendered to ours ТСЖ. The indebtedness total sum constitutes about one million roubles (1002844,00 rbl. on 8.11.2007). The circulation with claims in court does not bring results because of absence at debtors of property on which collection could be paid. Therefore the presentation of individual claims can lead only to an ineffectual loss of time and means. A unique way of the decision of a problem is eviction of deliberate defaulters of a payment for utilities from apartments taken by them. According to item 83 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation the lessor, that is municipality can present the rescissory action of the agreement of social hiring only. According to item 688 ГК the Russian Federation, a consequence of cancellation of such agreement is eviction on a court ground of the decision. Items of item 84 and 90 advance procedure of granting of other living quarters in exchange. The Item 14 items 1.6 ФЗ № 131 «About the general principles of the organisation of a local government in the Russian Federation» the conferred authorities are carried to the competence of municipal authorities of settlement in which territory there is a given municipal available housing. In this case it is settlement Ilichevo administration. Concerning the privatised apartments, according to item 293 ГК the Russian Federation the claim about eviction can be presented also by local government, namely, owing to the above-stated Federal statute № 131, an executive office of municipal settlement. In our case Ilichevsky rural administration. Long non-payment of municipal payments and use of services of an accomplishment of housing accommodation at the expense of other proprietors of the given apartment houses and other members ТСЖ, is regular infringement of rights and interests of neighbours that is the basis of the beginning of procedure of sale of such living quarters from market places for debt servicing on municipal payments. On living quarters the law does not provide Any other method of the circulation of collection, as the apartment or the house (as living quarters) are included into the property list on which the charging order in the general order cannot be paid. Thus, the decision of a problem of municipal defaults of payment in Ilyichevsk ТСЖ entirely depends on actions of Ilichevsky rural administration which has special powers on this point in question. It is necessary to notice that ТСЖ "Ilichevo" does not put end in itself deprivation of people of housing accommodation belonging to them as the above-stated legal procedures keep enough time to unfair debtors to reset the indebtedness on municipal payments. Proceeding from all aforesaid, ТСЖ "Ilichevo" asked settlement Ilichevo Administration to make in a statutory order claims in court on eviction of deliberate defaulters of municipal payments as it is carried by the law to their exclusive competence. ТСЖ "Ilichevo" is ready to grant necessary financial and legal documents for preparation of claims, and also to act in court as the third person interested in issue of a suit, on the party of the claimant.

3. Legal item ТСЖ of "Ilichevo".

ТСЖ "Ilichevo" considers that fact that any proceedings with suppliers of utilities can be connected with a significant legal cost, the long-term arbitration proceedings which outcome any of the parties know for certain cannot. Therefore ТСЖ "Ilichevo" is ready to begin proceedings concerning arrears on municipal payments concerning unfair defaulters concerning that period when the difference of tariffs for utilities met a loss most ТСЖ. However, now ТСЖ "Ilichevo" insists on the conclusion of the new agreement from Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13) on a heat supply which will conform the requirements of the law. Namely, to consider that ТСЖ answers only for the control over duly entering by holders of apartments of municipal payments, is responsible for default of any contractual obligations only in the presence of fault, pays utilities only at a rate of arriving money for payment of municipal payments by holders of apartments in apartment houses where ТСЖ "Ilichevo" is the operating organisation, does not bear responsibility for non-payment of municipal payments by individual holders of apartments under condition of fulfilment of proper actions under the advice of necessity to pay for utilities from outside ТСЖ when due hereunder, in any case ТСЖ cannot be delivered the agreement in position when it would be obliged to be in the red owing to actions of unfair defaulters of municipal payments for want of fault from its part. The given offer should be considered as the application for the conclusion of the new agreement between ТСЖ "Ilichevo" and Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13) as the assignee of Open Society" Красноярскэнерго "according to Agreement №8001 item 9.2 on a heat supply from 01.07.2002, the prisoner between ТСЖ« Ilichevo »and Open Society" Красноярскэнерго ". In any case ТСЖ« Ilichevo »reserves the right to involve Open Society« Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13) in proceedings with defaulters of municipal payments as co-plaintiff or the third person interested in issue of a suit.
Chairman ТСЖ of "Ilichevo"
Zajakin Valery Aleksandrovich ________________________ date ______

In Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)»
From ТСЖ "Ilichevo", Shushensky
Area, the item Ilichevo,
Street Moscow, д.13

The claim

On circumstances of making contract of power supply between ТСЖ "Ilichevo" and Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)» means the below-mentioned. Owing to article 422 ГК the Russian Federation about an agreement and law parity to be said that the agreement should correspond to obligatory rules for the parties, statutory and other elements of law (mandatory provisions) active at the moment of its conclusion. In force article 426 ГК the Russian Federation about definition of concept of the public agreement by the public agreement admits the agreement concluded by the commercial organisation and establishing its responsibilities on sale of goods, fulfilment of works or to rendering of services which such organisation on character of the activity should carry out concerning each who to it will address (a home shopping service, carriage by a common carrier, a telecommunication service, power supply, medical, hotel service, etc.) . The commercial organisation has not the right to give preference to one person before other concerning the conclusion of the public agreement, except cases, statutory and other elements of law. According to the agreement between ТСЖ "Ilichevo" and Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)» increased responsibility ТСЖ, except for circumstances of force-majeur, that is force majeure circumstances, and the responsibility to pay all delivered energy and water, including is established by that who does not consist in ТСЖ. ТСЖ "Ilichevo" is a nonprofit institution, therefore to it, as the same conditions should be applied to house owners of physical persons, that is those terms and conditions of contract of power supply which are advanced in the Civil code of the Russian Federation. Open Societies «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)» have been infringed rules of the public agreement for equality of customers (consumers) that has entailed a damage for ТСЖ at a rate of 1002844,00 rbl. (On 8.11.2007) as the money paid ТСЖ for deliberate defaulters of municipal payments for an abacus of diligent members ТСЖ of "Ilichevo". The given losses are liable owing to article 15 ГК the Russian Federation according to which the person which right is infringed, can require the full indemnification of the losses caused to it if the law or the agreement do not provide repairing a loss in the smaller size. And also, losses are understood as costs which the person, whose right is infringed, has made or should make for restoration of the infringed right, loss or damage of its property (a real damage), and also неполученные which this person would receive at civil circulation usual conditions if its right has not been infringed (loss of profit). Performance of given agreement ТСЖ causes a damage from outside Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)».
I ask Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)» voluntary to pay or зачесть on account of the future payments 1002844,00 rbl. in favour of ТСЖ "Ilichevo". Otherwise, ТСЖ will address to arbitration court for protection of the rights.

Chairman ТСЖ of "Ilichevo"
Заякин

In Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)»
From ТСЖ "Ilichevo", Shushensky
Area, the item Ilichevo,
Street Moscow, д.13

The claim

On circumstances of making contract of power supply between ТСЖ "Ilichevo" and Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)» means the below-mentioned. Owing to article 422 ГК the Russian Federation about an agreement and law parity to be said that the agreement should correspond to obligatory rules for the parties, statutory and other legal acts (mandatory provisions) acting at the moment of its conclusion. In force article 426 ГК the Russian Federation about definition of concept of the public agreement by the public agreement admits the agreement concluded by the commercial organisation and establishing its responsibilities on sale of the goods, to fulfilment of works or rendering of services which such organisation on character of the activity should carry out concerning everyone who to it will address (a home shopping service, carriage by a common carrier, a telecommunication service, power supply, medical, hotel service, etc.) . The commercial organisation has not the right to give preference to one person before another concerning the conclusion of the public agreement, except cases, statutory and other legal acts. According to the agreement between ТСЖ "Ilichevo" and Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)» increased responsibility ТСЖ, except for circumstances of force-majeur, that is force majeure circumstances, and the responsibility to pay all delivered energy and water, including is established by that who does not consist in ТСЖ. ТСЖ "Ilichevo" is a non-profit organisation, therefore to it, as the same conditions should be applied to house owners of physical persons, that is those terms and conditions of contract of power supply which are advanced in the Civil code of the Russian Federation. Open Societies «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)» have been infringed rules of the public agreement for equality of customers (consumers) that has entailed a damage for ТСЖ at a rate of 1002844,00 rbl. (On 8.11.2007) as the money paid ТСЖ for deliberate defaulters of municipal payments for an abacus of diligent members ТСЖ of "Ilichevo". The given losses are liable owing to article 15 ГК the Russian Federation according to which the person which right is infringed, can require the full indemnification of the losses caused to it if the law or the agreement do not provide repairing a loss in the smaller size. And also, losses are understood as costs which the person, whose right is infringed, has made or should make for restoration of the infringed right, loss or damage of its property (a real damage), and also not received incomes which this person would receive at civil circulation regular courses of business if its right has not been infringed (loss of profit). Performance of given agreement ТСЖ causes a damage from outside Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)».
I ask Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)» voluntary to pay or зачесть on account of the future payments 1002844,00 rbl. in favour of ТСЖ "Ilichevo". Otherwise, ТСЖ will address to arbitration court for protection of the rights.

In world court
From ТСЖ

The statement of claim

Citizen Barysheva A.I. has run into debt for municipal payments concerning ТСЖ 25370,00 roubles. ТСЖ has paid Open Society «Yenisei ТГК» the utilities represented in an apartment house where the respondent in the complete size lives. Open Society consent «Yenisei ТГК» as энергоснабжащей the organisations on thermal energy granting from outside ТСЖ as subscriber to the respondent as to the subsubscriber is meant according to the appendix to contract on which the given apartment house is indicated in the demand for granting of utilities as a whole. Therefore the request of item 545 ГК the Russian Federation is observed. By implication agreements between ТСЖ and Open Society «Yenisei ТГК» the claimant purchases thermal energy under the agreement of power supply and delivers individual holders of apartments, including to the respondent. ТСЖ delivers thermal energy to holders of apartments in an apartment house where the claimant under the tariffs lives. That is ТСЖ purchases thermal energy from Open Society «Yenisei ТГК» and sells holders of apartments, including, the respondent. There is it within the limits of the power supply agreement as versions of the contract of purchase in application to supply by thermal energy. Therefore between ТСЖ and ответчицой rules of the agreement for power supply, including a rule of item 540 ГК the Russian Federation that in a case when as the subscriber under the power supply agreement the citizen using energy for household consumption acts, the agreement is considered the prisoner from the moment of the first actual connection of the subscriber when due hereunder to the attached network act. Therefore the indebtedness of the respondent for thermal energy concerning ТСЖ should be considered as default of the agreement for power supply regarding the responsibility to pay thermal energy received under the agreement. According to the item 547 ГК the Russian Federation in cases of default or inadequate discharge of the obligation under the agreement of power supply the party which has infringed the obligation, is obliged to indemnify the real loss caused to it (item 2 of article 15 ГК the Russian Federation). The real damage in this case is an amount outstanding on payments for thermal energy from outside respondents as costs which ТСЖ should make for restoration of the infringed right to receive payment for presented thermal energy.
Proceeding from all aforesaid I ask to collect from the respondent of 25370,00 roubles in favour of ТСЖ.

In Arbitration court of Krasnoyarsk region
The claimant: ТСЖ "Ilichevo"
The respondent: Administration Municipal
Formations settlement Ilichevo

The claim

Concerning ТСЖ "Ilichevo" by the regional authorities at regional level three-year rates of consumption have been given. Last winter was is abnormal the warm. Owing to what the economy took place. Administration of the item of Ilichevo has abused the right to approve the given tariffs at local level and has considerably lowered them. However, this winter cold weather has led to the over-expenditure of the energy carrier and members ТСЖ should pay the sums over the sizes of grants for payment of utilities which gives the state. It has entailed a material damage concerning members ТСЖ and loss of reputation of board TSZH "Ильичево" concerning the members. Deliberate injury ТСЖ of "Ilichevo" from outside administrations of the item of Ilichevo in the form of eventual recklessness takes place. At decrease in rates of consumption the respondent meaningly supposed causing of a material damage to the claimant in case the winter would be cold, as takes place. The given decision of the respondent is issued by the decree of advice of regional deputies №111а for December, 2006.
I ask to collect from the respondent _______________ rbl.

In world court
From ТСЖ

The statement of claim

Citizen Shmajlov S.N. has got into debt for municipal payments and an accommodation payment concerning ТСЖ 26556,55 roubles. ТСЖ has paid Open Society «Yenisei ТГК» the utilities represented in an apartment house where the respondent in the complete size lives. Open Society consent «Yenisei ТГК» as энергоснабжащей the organisations on thermal energy and water granting from outside ТСЖ as subscriber to the respondent as to the subsubscriber is meant according to the appendix to contract on which the given apartment house is indicated in the demand for granting of utilities as a whole. Therefore the request of item 545 ГК the Russian Federation is observed. By implication contracts between ТСЖ and Open Society «Yenisei ТГК» the claimant purchases thermal energy and water by agreement power supply and delivers to individual holders of apartments, including to the respondent. ТСЖ delivers thermal energy to holders of apartments in an apartment house where the claimant under the tariffs lives. That is ТСЖ purchases thermal energy and cold water from Open Society «Yenisei ТГК» and sells holders of apartments, including, to the respondent. There is it within the limits of the power supply agreement as versions of the contract of purchase in application to supply by thermal energy and water. Therefore between ТСЖ and the respondent rules of the agreement for power supply, including the rule of item 540 ГК the Russian Federation that in a case when as the subscriber by agreement power supply the citizen using energy for household consumption acts, the agreement is considered the prisoner from the moment of the first actual connection of the subscriber when due hereunder to the attached network operate. Therefore the indebtedness of the respondent for thermal energy and water concerning ТСЖ should be considered as default of the agreement for power supply regarding the responsibility to pay thermal energy received by agreement and water. According to the item 547 ГК the Russian Federation in cases of default or inadequate discharge of the obligation by agreement power supply the party which has infringed the obligation, is obliged to indemnify the real loss caused to it (item 2 of article 15 ГК the Russian Federation). The real damage in this case is an amount outstanding on payments for thermal energy from outside respondents as costs which ТСЖ should make for restoration of the infringed right to receive payment for presented thermal energy.
Besides, according to item 3 of item 155 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation employers of living quarters by agreement social hiring and to the employment agreement of living quarters of the state or municipal available housing in an apartment house, management which is carried out by the legal body irrespective of the organisation-legal form or the individual businessman (further - the operating organisation), introduce a payment for the contents and living quarters repair, and also a payment for utilities of this operating organisation. Owing to item 148 ЖК the Russian Federation, is included into responsibilities of board of association of proprietors of housing accommodation management of an apartment house or the conclusion of contracts on management of it. As the management agreement многоквартирны The house or the conclusion of contracts on management of it. As the agreement of management of an apartment house where the respondent lives, with any organisation is not concluded, the association of proprietors of housing accommodation in this case is considered operating organisation and has the right to accommodation payment reception. On the basis of item 678 ГК the Russian Federation the employer is obliged to introduce in time a payment for living quarters, and also under the law general rule independently to introduce municipal payments.
Respondent Shmajlov S.N. completely has not introduced an accommodation payment.
Proceeding from all aforesaid, I ask to collect from respondent Shmajlova S.N. of 26556,55 roubles in favour of ТСЖ.

Legal qualification
(Consultation)

Concerning citizen Tselukovskogo A.M. criminal case on an actus reus threat by murder is initiated. In this case, the actus reus threat by murder in actions of citizen Tselukovskogo A.M. is not present, as, first, citizen Tselukovskij A.M. had no intention to create in consciousness of citizen Nevolinoj I.I. reliance that it can really take life it. The given statement had character of bravado on purpose to demonstrate that he was not frightened of Nevolinoj I.I.'s threats to involve in business of representatives of the organised crime which have been stated by it before Tselukovskim A.M.'s pronouncing of words that he ostensibly wished it to kill. The statement had for an object to bring to nothing Nevolinoj I.I.'s threats and to prevent its aggressive behaviour which consisted in insults and drawing of a beating of Tselukovskomu A.M. The given phrase had for an object to demonstrate absence of fear before «братками» or "roof" of a bar "Bear" as means of prevention of their interference in the given conflict, that is the justifiable defence took place. Besides, the alleged danger, has been said for the purpose of prevention of actions of Nevolinoj I.I. which put a beating (blows by hands on the person) Tselukovskogo A.M. and offended it. Whereas citizen Tselukovskij A.M. wished to return to the company, a group of persons together with which he spent leisure-time in a bar "Bear". Except desire to discourage, revive (but not really to frighten murder) citizen Nevolinu I.I., the manager and the holder of a bar "Bear" and by that to prevent violent acts from its party in the relation it, and also insults which she constantly stated, the given action of other purposes had no. The given phrase which formally contained threat by murder, has been said mechanically, in the heat of the conflict and had without delay desire to demonstrate a self-trust from outside citizen Tselukovskogo A.M., but not to promote in any way to occurrence of thoughts at Nevolinoj I.I. that it could take life it really. Conditions of the conflict: the space before a bar was crowded a place, in a bar there were many people who could interfere with quarrel. Citizen Tselukovskij A.M. differs peaceful character (it was in an alcohol intoxication and the conflict has been provoked by the mistress of a bar). Secondly, had no place availability of thoughts at Nevolinoj I.I. that can really kill her. It continued quarrel and stated insults, put a beating. It means that it has not been frightened. Whereas, the thought that it could lose a life, inevitably should cause discouraging effect on any person. Especially, it is a question of the woman. All aforesaid testifies that threat to kill, the stated Tselukovskij A.M. concerning Nevolinoj I.I., had no real character. It was the alleged danger. Thus, in Tselukovskogo A.M.'s actions there was no intention to make impression of real threat by murder, and also there have not come the criminal consequences provided by the criminal law for the given actus reus: citizen Nevolina I.I. was not frightened, as understood that threat imaginary and it is provoked by its violent and offensive actions, and also threat to involve to the conflict of representatives of underworld which ostensibly render service protection concerning a bar "Bear" and its holders. Thus, the actus reus threat by murder in Tselukovskogo A.M.'s actions is not present.

The lawyer _____________________________________________________________

The contract of agency

Article 1. The Contract of agency

1. Under the given contract of agency Zyuzin Maxim Jurevich, passport 04 02 692405 (attorney) undertakes to make on behalf of and at the expense of other party TSZH "Ильичево", Krasnoyarsk region, the item of Ilichevo, street Moscow 13, an INN 2442009420, (principal) certain acts in law namely to render to the principal protection of the legal rights during representation in arbitration, arbitration tribunals and courts of law, Office of Public Prosecutor, judicial authorities, including service of court ushers, bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and others state, municipal and public organisations and among citizens in connection with granting of a legal aid to the principal to attorneys. The rights and responsibilities under the bargain made by the attorney, arise directly at the principal.

Article 2. Compensation of the attorney

1. The principal is obliged to pay to the attorney compensation at a rate of 5000 roubles a month.

Article 3. Commission performance according to instructions of the principal

1. The attorney is obliged to execute the commission given to his according to instructions of the principal. Instructions of the principal should be lawful, realizable and concrete.
2. The attorney has the right to recede from instructions of the principal if based on the circumstances of a matter it is necessary in interests of the principal and the attorney could not enquire previously the principal or has not received in reasonable term of the answer to the inquiry. The attorney is obliged to notify the principal on the admitted deviations as soon as the advice became possible.

Article 4. Responsibilities of the attorney

The attorney is obliged:
Personally to execute the commission given to its, except for the cases indicated in article 976 of the Civil code;
To inform the principal on its request all data on commission course of execution;
To transmit to the principal immediately all received under the bargains made in pursuance of the commission;
After performance of the commission or at a termination of the contract of the commission before its performance immediately to return to the principal the power of attorney which period of validity has not expired, and to deliver the report with the appendix of vouchers if it is required under terms and conditions of contract or character of the commission.

Article 5. Responsibilities of the principal

1. The principal is obliged to issue to the attorney the power of attorney (powers of attorney) on fulfilment of the acts in law provided by the contract of agency.
2. The principal is obliged, if other is not provided by the agreement:
To reimburse to the attorney cost outlays;
To ensure believed by the means necessary for performance of the commission.
3. The principal is obliged to accept immediately from believed all executed by it according to the contract of agency.

Article 6. A commission Termination of the contract

1. The contract of agency ceases owing to:
Cancellations of the commission by the principal;
Failure of the attorney;
Death of the principal or the attorney, recognition someone from them incapacitated, ограниченно capable or it is unknown the absent.
2. The principal has the right to cancel the commission, and believed to refuse it at any time. The agreement on failure of this right is insignificant.

Article 7. Consequences of a termination of the contract of the commission

1. If the contract of agency is terminated before the commission is executed by the attorney completely, the principal is obliged to reimburse to the attorney the commissions incurred at performance costs and when compensation was due to the attorney, also to pay it compensation in proportion to the work executed by it. This rule is not applied to performance by the attorney of the commission after he has learnt or should learn about the commission termination.
2. Cancellation by the principal of the commission is not the basis for the repairing a loss, caused believed by a commission termination of the contract.
3. Failure of the attorney of performance of the commission of the principal is not the basis for the repairing a loss, caused to the principal a commission termination of the contract, except for cases of failure believed in conditions when the principal is deprived possibility differently to ensure the interests, and also failure of the execution of a contract providing actions of the attorney as the commercial representative.

Chairman of board ТСЖ of "Ilichevo"

Zajakin Valery Aleksandrovich ___________________________________

Zyuzin Maxim Jurevich _________________________________________

08.11.2007

In Ilichevsky rural administration
Merkel Ivan Aleksandrovichu
From Chairman of board ТСЖ
«Ильичево» Zajakina Valery
Александровича

The circulation

At present in Ilyichevsk ТСЖ there was a difficult situation with the fee, rendered to ours ТСЖ. The indebtedness Total sum constitutes about one million roubles (1002844,00 rbl. on 8.11.2007). The circulation with claims in court does not bring results because of absence at debtors of property on which collection could be paid. Therefore the presentation of individual claims can lead only to an ineffectual loss of time and means. A unique way of the decision of a problem is eviction of deliberate defaulters of a payment for utilities from apartments taken by them. According to item 83 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation the lessor, that is municipality can present the rescissory action of the agreement of social hiring only. According to item 688 ГК the Russian Federation, a consequence of cancellation of such agreement is eviction on a court ground of the decision. Items of item 84 and 90 advance procedure of granting of other living quarters in exchange. The Item 14 items 1.6 ФЗ № 131 «About the general principles of the organisation of a local government in the Russian Federation» the conferred authorities are carried to the competence of municipal authorities of settlement in which territory there is a given municipal available housing. In this case it is settlement Ilichevo administration. Concerning the privatised apartments, according to item 293 ГК the Russian Federation the claim about eviction can be presented also by local government, namely, owing to the above-stated Federal statute № 131, an executive office of municipal settlement. In our case Ilichevsky rural administration. Long non-payment of municipal payments and use of services of an accomplishment of housing accommodation at the expense of other proprietors of the given apartment houses and other members ТСЖ, is regular infringement of rights and interests of neighbours that is the basis of the beginning of procedure of sale of such living quarters from market places for debt servicing on municipal payments. On living quarters the law does not provide Any other method of the circulation of collection, as the apartment or the house (as living quarters) are included into the property list on which the charging order in the general order cannot be paid. Thus, the decision of a problem of municipal defaults of payment in Ilyichevsk ТСЖ entirely depends on actions of Ilichevsky rural administration which has special powers on this point in question. It is necessary to notice that ТСЖ "Ilichevo" does not put end in itself deprivation of people of housing accommodation belonging to them as the above-stated legal procedures keep enough time to unfair debtors to reset the indebtedness on municipal payments.
Proceeding from all aforesaid, ТСЖ "Ilichevo" asks settlement Ilichevo Administration to make claims in court on eviction of deliberate defaulters of municipal payments as it is carried by the law to your exclusive competence.
ТСЖ "Ilichevo" it is ready To grant necessary financial and legal documents for preparation of claims, and also to act in court as the third person interested in issue of a suit, on the party of the claimant.

To the chairman of the council of deputies МО
The item of Ilichevo
To Bystritsky Tatyana Nikolaevne
From Chairman ТСЖ of "Ilichevo"
Zajakina Valery Aleksandrovicha

The offer

The problem of defaults of payment for utilities and a housing payment from outside debtors ТСЖ of "Ilichevo" is not the isolated problem of our organisation. Such persons regularly infringe upon the rights of neighbours of members ТСЖ and cause to them moral, and sometimes and a material damage. Nevertheless, it is necessary to recognise that the given problem has social character. I believe that the given problem quite разрешима under condition of interaction of all interested persons (bodies state and municipal authority and public organisations). I suggest to consolidate efforts of Ilichevsky Rural administration and ТСЖ "Ilichevo". Namely, to solve a problem as follows. The first to sue on behalf of a city government with the participation ТСЖ as the third person interested in issue of a suit, and also neighbours of debtors (the persons leading асоциальный a way of life) as co-plaintiffs, for definition of the sum of a joint debt (mental cruelty concerning neighbours and non-payment for utilities and a housing payment) and substantiations of necessity of resettlement of debtors for protection of the rights of neighbours. If the apartment is privatised, it is necessary to ask court about sale of apartment from market places for redemption of a debt and resettlement. The remained sum is expedient for spending for purchase of inhabited uncomfortable premises of smaller cost, and a difference to spend for the contents of the given persons within the limits of the agreement of perpetual maintenance (rent) between Ilichevsky rural administration and the former holders of uncomfortable housing accommodation provided that it is a question of elderly lonely people. In other cases, believing necessary to start with statutory provisions. On not privatised housing accommodation I believe necessary to eject the given persons within the limits of positions of the Housing Code. I consider that the Ilichevsky rural administration should be interested in such decision of a question for maintenance with housing accommodation of persons which are in turn on housing accommodation reception.

Chairman ТСЖ of "Ilichevo"
Zajakin Valery Aleksandrovich __________________ date ____________

To the chief of a legal department
«Yenisei ТГК» ________________

From Director ТСЖ of "Ilichevo"
Zajakina Valery Aleksandrovicha,
The item of Ilichevo, street Moscow 9,
Ph. 26541,

The offer on mutual settlement of debts

I ask you to consider clearing possibility in the order your cooperation with coal monopolies, namely: clearing on the basis of an equity swap at the expense of an augmentation of capital of your aggregate profits for settlement of mutual debt extinction on the basis of an exchange of bonds for investment of these securities in bank both exchange sphere and payments to you of dividends and incomes under bonds at excess of interest payments on them over an average bank interest as the award under the labour contract or acquisitions of shares by you and bonds on the basis of civil contracts. All it for maintenance of your investments into Open Society _____________________________________________________
For financing of the project of an alternative source of energy in sphere of automobile and other transport (the coal dust burns down not up to the end in a cylinder at the expense of energy of the generator on нихромовой spirals and ensures functioning of the engine on carbonic oxide), and also development of the enterprises of a small-scale business under the project of manufacturing of all-the-year-round tyre covers (restoration of old tyres (tyre covers) on all-the-year-round металлокордированные with metal flat inserts on the basis of Open Society ___________________________ in territory of our village council.

Chairman ТСЖ of "Ilichevo" Zajakin Valery Aleksandrovich _____________________________________

To the director of Ilichevsky high school
To Kirimovu Vladimir Jurevichu
From Chairman ТСЖ of "Ilichevo"
Zajakina Valery Aleksandrovicha

The circulation

In apartment about the item of Ilichevo, street Moscow, д. 19, sq. 14, fixed to Ilichevsky high school, citizen Eshchenko Lyudmila Nikolaevna lived. At present payment of utilities (heating) is not made. Non-payment мотивирована that Eshchenko L. N at present does not live in apartment. However, according to item 11 of item 155 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation non-use by the employer of a premise is not the basis for невнесения payments for living quarters and utilities. We ask you to explain, whether is the apartment to the above-stated address departmental housing accommodation, to be in a municipal or state available housing or is privatised. Who carries out authorities of the proprietor concerning the given apartment? It is terminated or not the agreement of social hiring from Eshchenko L.N.? On 01.11.07 the indebtedness on the given living quarters for the utilities represented from outside ТСЖ by "Ilichevo", constitutes 16292 roubles of 69 copecks.
Chairman ТСЖ of "Ilichevo"
Zajakin Valery Aleksandrovich ______________ date _________

To the director of Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)»
Hmurovu A.A.
From chairman ТСЖ of "Ilichevo"
Zajakina V. A,
Shushensky area, the item Ilichevo,
Street Moscow, д.13,
Ph. 39139 26541

The letter

The dear director of Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)», I hasten to have to inform you that in interaction of our two organisations there was a situation when rights ТСЖ of "Ilichevo" and its independence and, in general, ability to decide assigned to it members ТСЖ, proprietors of housing accommodation, functions are brought under the big attention to the question. Owing to the developed practice almost all money resources ТСЖ leave on operative service of the indebtedness for energy represented by your organisation. The matter is that we have a considerable quantity of deliberate defaulters from among house owners of those houses in which relation we are the serving organisation. Work on collection of debts goes, but not so is fast as it would be desirable. I have in view of duration of proceedings and absence at debtors of property on which collection can be paid is frequent. These debtors, as a rule, do not enter in ТСЖ, using it as the occasion not to pay for utilities and housing accommodation service. That is legally such persons have no direct relation to ТСЖ. Even the world court uses this fact (that they are not members ТСЖ) as an occasion to dismissal of a case. Such persons too do not conclude the agreement of any kind. At present we sue from the agreement between ТСЖ and Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)» on which we перепродаем energy delivered by you to tenants as to sub-subscribers recognising that indicating all apartments in which energy delivered by you moves, are indicated in the demand for delivery of energy irrespective of membership in ТСЖ. It is necessary for us so far as as other possibility to recover a debt is not present. If we have sued about unjust enrichment of defaulters, holders of apartments, at our expense, that under the law we should not receive anything as would take a place attempt to collect as superficial that would be granted performed by the nonexistent obligation. Better to say, court failure to satisfy the claim because as a matter of fact ТСЖ has no the direct responsibility registered in the law would follow, to ensure delivery of energy concerning persons who are not members ТСЖ as the law saves behind them the right to receive energy from your organisation directly. The claim from injury also is unpromising, owing to that the fact of granting of the given service from outside ТСЖ to holders of apartments, not to members ТСЖ, voluntary and осознанно, would be considered as intention from outside persons to whom it is damnified that would entail significant reduction of the size of civil responsibility of defaulters. That is, the agreement between ТСЖ "Ilichevo" and Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)» on energy delivery is considered by us at present as having for our organisations legal force. Nevertheless, we recognise that also we in turn should not abuse the rights concerning your monopoly which should deliver energy to everything, and, as a matter of fact, cannot disconnect heat even in case of 100 % of non-payment as in the winter it would mean possible loss of health and even a life. Therefore we are ready to incur burden of collection of debts for the energy delivered by you from all persons who are indicated in the agreement as recipients of energy. Though it is necessary for us to refer to the agreement between ТСЖ "Ilichevo" and Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)», as in that case that fact that defaulters evade from the conclusion of any contracts to avoid necessity to pay for the received energy, does not matter, as the agreement is considered the prisoner upon joining to a network on which energy moves. We perfectly understand that that legal scheme in which frameworks we work, has developed as practice of the decision of problems of municipal reform in other countries where it took place earlier. However, we cannot refuse completely at present an expenditure of means on housing accommodation service only to finance a debt of defaulters which have to ТСЖ no direct legal relationship. We ask you to concern with understanding problems of our organisation as we do the same. From the legal standpoint, for the fact that ТСЖ for the law should pay, it does in time. It is a question of debts of members ТСЖ. Though considering that ТСЖ basically does not answer on debts of the members on municipal payments (though representatives of your organisation confuse concept of a society in participation as commercial organisation where joint and several liability of companions on society in participation debts and on the contrary takes place, and associations of proprietors of housing accommodation as nonprofit institution) and the agreement between ТСЖ "Ilichevo" and Open Society «Yenisei ТГК (ТГК-13)» it is not valid because of non-observance of rules about the public agreement, namely a principle of equality of all consumers of energy in municipal sphere, it is possible to tell that on ТСЖ from outside your monopoly is not present real legal mechanisms of effect. Therefore that we attend to debt collecting from deliberate defaulters whereas we simply could sue about the repairing a loss, caused by performance of the illegal agreement and require to include the sum paid to your monopoly for deliberate defaulters on account of the future payments of members ТСЖ, it should be considered as display of good will which should exclude any pressure from outside your employees which is often expressed in aggressive statements up to threats of criminal prosecution, charges in incompetence, simply incorrect ambitious behaviour which involves sincerely desires to refuse cooperation with your organisation on present conditions, and simply to refuse a problem of non-payment of debts from outside deliberate defaulters. Any mechanism to force us to it the law does not provide. Despite it, it is necessary to notice that there was an understanding and desire to co-operate in the order legal services between our organisations. Nevertheless, till now there is understanding in the order no services of verification of accounts, representatives which recognise that ТСЖ has no independence in a cash drawdown arriving in a target order on housing accommodation service. The opinion takes place that ТСЖ is obliged to let all money resources on financing of a debt of defaulters whereas from us rank-and-file members require concrete measures on repair and housing accommodation service. There is an impression that your employees believe that ТСЖ only and exists to decide problems with sales of your production. I regard necessary to notice that ТСЖ is an independent participant of a civil-law turn-over. It has the right to a recognition of legal equality and legal independence. Certainly, we do not wish to create dangerous precedents and to exercise our rights to the detriment your organisation when we have possibility to solve a problem in essence, namely to force deliberate defaulters to pay a debt. That is to solve a problem particularly. However, it is not necessary these to abuse. It is necessary to have patience and to reckon with interests of counterparts, instead of to give vent to ambitions.

Chairman ТСЖ of "Ilichevo"
Zajakin Valery Aleksandrovich _________________ date ___________

ТСЖ "Ilichevo", Krasnoyarsk
Edge, the item of Ilichevo, street Moscow 13.
INN 2442009420
THE POWER OF ATTORNEY
From 11.11.2007

The given power of attorney is issued lawyer ТСЖ of "Ilichevo" Zyuzin Maxim Jurevichu, passport 0402692405 is issued 21.01.2003 Shushensky РОВД Krasnoyarsk region, for representation and protection of interests ТСЖ of "Ilichevo" in arbitration, arbitration tribunals and courts of law, Office of Public Prosecutor, judicial authorities, including service of court ushers, bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and others state, municipal and public organisations, and also among citizens in connection with granting of a legal aid to the principal the attorney. With the right signing of the statement of claim and the recall on the statement of claim, applications for the security for cost, transfer of business to the arbitration tribunal complete or partial withdrawal of claims and adoption of an action, basis or subject of action change, the conclusion of the agreement of lawsuit and the agreement under actual facts, transfer of the authorities of the representative to other person (retrust), and also the right to signing of the case to move for new trial of judicial certificates on again opened circumstances, the appeal of the judicial certificate of arbitration court, reception of the awarded money resources or other property. The given power of attorney is issued with the power of substitution to third persons, for a period of three years. The power of attorney is issued according to the contract of agency from 08.11.2007.

Chairman of board ТСЖ of "Ilichevo"
Zajakin Valery Aleksandrovich _________________________________

In the Full court
On civil cases
Supreme court of judicature
The Russian Federation
From Belenkovoj A.P.
(Respondents on business),
Living on
To the address: Krasnoyarsk
Edge, 662710,
The item Shushensky,
Street Krivenko, д. 16

The supervising complaint

Following persons participated in business:
Bakhtin P. P (claimant), living to the address: 662710, the item Shushensky, quarter СХТ, 15-16;
Pospelov So-called, (соответчица), living to the address: 652232, the item Berikulsky, street of the Miner, 93 Tula Area, the Kemerovo region;
Management of Federal registration service (the third person, not declaring independent requests on the matter in dispute), 662710, the item Shushensky, 2-33.
Business was considered by Shushensky district court of Krasnoyarsk region in the first instance and Krasnoyarsk regional court in court of cassation.
Bakhtin P. P Pospelovoj of So-called cost about collection of 3/12 shares of the apartment house belonging to it on the property right on the basis of the certificate of ownership on the inheritance has addressed to court with the claim to Belenkovoj A.P. The court of first instance has born the decision on satisfaction of the claim (28.10.2008). The court of court of cassation has kept a court decision of the first instance without change (04.02.2009).
However, Bahtinoj P. P's claim to Belenkovoj A.P. in the same subject was already presented (a compensation in money request for 3/12 apartment houses). From 20.06.2000 it is kept by the decision of Shushensky district court without satisfaction on following arguments: there was available other succession, the agreement on which section between successors has not been reached, and the court has considered what to put a question about section only succession parts, instead of all succession as a whole would be wrongful. Now still dispute on section of other succession in the sum of 182 810 roubles on a tentative estimation which Bakhtin P. P's claimant has appropriated before the expiration of 6-month's term for inheritance acceptance and which has not undergone through distribution procedure on the hereditary business got by the notary is not settled. It is necessary to notice that under the decision of degrees of jurisdiction from Belenkovoj A.P. is decided to collect 115 986 roubles. That is amounts due are comparable and there could be probably mutual settlement of counter obligations on clearing. That is, the cause of action too were not changed. Facts of the case from the moment of awarding judgement of Shushensky district court from 20.06.2000 by the time of removal of the repeated decision under the given claim from 28.10.2008 essentially were not changed. That is removal of a repeated court decision of the same instance under the same claim and for the same bases in infringement of item 134 ГПК the Russian Federation took place. The judge has been notified on it at granting by the husband of respondent Belenkovoj A.P. of the inquiry that it is on treatment in hospital in a grave condition. Because respondent Belenkova A.P. was not present on court because of a serious illness and for the same reason could not ensure presence of the representative, and business has been considered by court for lack of the respondent, she has not indicated availability of dispute on other part of the succession. That is the material breach of the law of procedures which has affected the made decision takes place.
Proceeding from all aforesaid and being based on item 134, 387, 390 ГПК the Russian Federation, I ask:
To cancel the decision court of the first and court of cassation and to terminate production on business.
Following documents are applied on the supervising complaint:
1) the Decision of Shushensky district court from 20.06.2000
2) the Decision of Shushensky district court from 28.10.2008
3) Cassation definition of Krasnoyarsk regional court from 04.02.2009

Respondent Belenkova
Anna Pavlovna __________________________________________

Legal qualification of data granted by the client (Legal advice)Theft or swindle cannot take place, as the seller knew that shortage will be found out and there is no fact of secret withdrawal of the property. Assignment and waste it is impossible, because the agreement for a complete individual or collective liability is not signed. Injury is impossible for interests of the commercial organisation owing to that is a question of the seller, instead of the official (the accountant, the auditor) shop. Arbitrariness is impossible, as there are no violent acts on autocratic realisation of the prospective right. There is available a fact of counter extortion and abusing official position of the husband of the mistress of shop. The given receipt on a debt should be challenged in court as made under the threat for deprivation of the receipt of legal force (~40 000 roubles). There are indirect demonstrations of interest of the mistress of shop to make artificial shortage under accounts: It together with the husband is the guarantor on a considerable credit which recipient has disappeared and does not wish to co-operate with bank for debt servicing (~400 000 roubles). Even if money also was withdrawn by the seller, the emergency excluding the criminal liability (necessity to pay expensive treatment to the relative, etc.) or self-defence of the civil rights within the limits of civil-law institute unjust enrichment (the salary is obviously underestimated and there does not correspond to work volume, work at an inopportune time etc., etc.) can take place only. The disciplinary responsibility within the limits of the labour legislation can take place only. Lawyer Zyuzin Maxim Jurevich _____________ date ______________Phone/fax: 8(39139) 35887Honeycombs. Ph. 89080232851, 89130446856Email: zuzinmaxim@mail.ruP.S. I regard necessary to make legal investigation on the given facts for preparation for performance in world court on criminal case as the public defender or on a civil case as the representative.

My CV and scientific and practice works on law.

пятница, 1 мая 2009 г.

My business projects.