home  /  the contract  /  Plenum of the Supreme Council on the recovery of court costs. Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on reimbursement of legal costs

Plenum of the Supreme Council on the recovery of court costs. Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on reimbursement of legal costs

the contract
24.05.2021

M.G. Sukhovskaya, lawyer

"High" conclusions on legal costs

Clarifications of the RF Armed Forces on reimbursement of costs when considering economic, civil and administrative disputes

Resolution of the Plenum of the Armed Forces dated January 21, 2016 No. 1(hereinafter - Resolution No. 1) The considered Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Council you will find: section "Legislation" of the ConsultantPlus system

In whatever court case you have to participate - arbitration, civil or administrative, the same rule applies everywhere: the losing party should compensate the person in whose favor the court made a decision, the paid state fee and the costs associated with the consideration of the case Art. 101, part 1 of Art. 110 APC RF; h. 1 tbsp. 88, part 1 of Art. 98 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation; h. 1 tbsp. 103, part 1 of Art. 111 CAS RF.

Not so long ago, the Plenum of the Supreme Court devoted a separate Resolution to the nuances of reimbursement of legal costs. Therefore, those who are already participating in litigation or is just going to sue, we suggest that you familiarize yourself with the most interesting provisions of this document.

What can be attributed to costs

I must say that in the APC of the Russian Federation, and in the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, and in the Code administrative proceedings(CAS RF) lists of costs recognized as legal costs are approximately the same. In particular, they include m Art. 106 of the APC RF; Art. 94 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation; Art. 106 CAS RF:

  • amounts paid to experts, specialists, witnesses, translators;
  • costs of paying for the services of representatives (lawyers and other persons providing legal assistance);
  • travel and accommodation costs of the parties and interested persons associated with the appearance in court;
  • on-site inspection costs;
  • other expenses, recognized by the court necessary for the consideration of the case.

That is, these lists are open. In this regard, the sun indicated that to reimbursable legal costs court also can refer the following types of expenses.

VIEW 1. Expenses incurred plaintiff or applicant to collect evidence, necessary for him to file a claim in court p. 2 of Resolution No. 1... These are, for example, costs:

  • for the legalization of foreign official documents;
  • to be provided by a notary forensic evidence, in particular, confirming the placement of certain information on the Internet;
  • to conduct a pre-trial examination of the condition of the property, on the basis of which the price of the claim filed with the court is then determined;
  • to notarize the representative's power of attorney if it was issued to him for participation in a specific case or a specific court session in the case.

VIEW 2. Compliance costs claim or otherwise pre-trial order dispute settlement p. 4 of Resolution No. 1, for example:

  • to draw up and send a claim to a counterparty. Recall that, according to the law, before going to court, a claim must be sent, in particular, to the carrier or forwarder, the operator of postal or other communications, as well as to the seller, if the claim concerns the quantity, assortment, quality, completeness, packaging or packaging of goods and clause 1 of Art. 483, paragraph 1 of Art. 797 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation; clause 1 of Art. 12 of the Law of 30.06.2003 No. 87-FZ; Art. 37 of the Law of 17.07.99 No. 176-FZ; paragraph 4 of Art. 55 of the Law of 07.07.2003 No. 126-FZ;
  • to prepare a report on an individual market appraisal of a real estate object in the case when a company is going to challenge its cadastral value Art. 24.18 of the Law of 29.07.98 No. 135-FZ;
  • to appeal to the Office of the Federal Tax Service of acts tax authorities non-normative nature and actions (inaction) of their officialsclause 2 of Art. 138 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.
We wrote in detail about the pre-trial stage of challenging the cadastral value of land and real estate:

This is a very important clarification, because the costs of complying with a mandatory claim or pre-trial procedure can be significant. Until now, the courts have often rejected the costs incurred by the winning party in the pre-trial stage of the dispute. see, for example, Resolution 18 of the AAC dated 09.19.2014 No. 18AP-10158/2014; 3 ААС dated 17.04.2014 No. А33-19881 / 2013.

The VS also noted that the so-called costs of expenses can also be reimbursed. These are expenses incurred by a party in the case when the court considers its separate claim for the recovery of legal costs, filed after the final decision was made. The question of the distribution of "costs to costs" can be resolved only within the framework of the consideration of this claim p. 28 of Resolution No. 1.

What costs should not be reimbursed

Those that were incurred when considering the following categories of cases Clause 18 of Resolution No. 1:

  • <или>on the establishment of facts having legal significance... For example, the fact of being dependent, the fact of owning and using real estate sub. 2, 6 p. 2 art. 264 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the fact of state registration of an organization or entrepreneur at a certain time and in a certain place e p. 2 h. 2 tbsp. 218 APC RF;
  • <или>on the definition legal regime property, in particular a case on the recognition of a movable thing as ownerless or on the recognition of ownership of an ownerless real estate Art. 290 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation;
  • <или>on the definition legal status persons involved in the case. These are, for example, cases on declaring a minor fully capable of clause 1 of Art. 287 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation.

The costs of such cases are borne by the persons who incurred them.

Reimbursement of expenses for payment of services of a representative

This is a significant, if not the main, part legal costs... By law, such costs are collected from the losing party. within reasonable limits h. 1 tbsp. 100 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation; h. 2 tbsp. 110 APC RF; Art. 112 CAS RF. Moreover, the reasonableness of the costs incurred for the representative must be proved by the winning party and Clause 20 of the Information Letter of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court dated 13.08.2004 No. 82.

In the opinion of the VS, the costs are considered reasonable, which, under comparable circumstances, are usually charged for similar services. When determining the boundaries of reasonableness, the court may take into account Clause 13 of Resolution No. 1:

  • the volume of the stated requirements;
  • the cost of the claim;
  • the complexity of the case;
  • the volume of services provided by the representative;
  • the time it takes to prepare them procedural documents;
  • the duration of the consideration of the case and other circumstances.

Attention

The court has no right arbitrarily reduce the amount of legal costs to be charged from the losing party, if the latter does not raise an objection and does not provide evidence that the costs incurred by the winner are excessive h. 3 tbsp. 111 of the APC RF; h. 4 tbsp. 1 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation; h. 4 tbsp. 2 CAS RF; Clause 11 of Resolution No. 1.

And here the knowledge of the representative for the purposes of reasonableness should not be taken into account Clause 13 of Resolution No. 1. Thus, the loser, claiming that the costs of the representative are excessive, has the right to appeal to the argument that the winner has resorted to the services of too expensive lawyers.

Travel and accommodation costs for representatives must also be reimbursed reasonably based on the prices of the region in which they were incurred. Clause 14 of Resolution No. 1... But the costs of familiarization with the case materials, sending documents, mobile communications and the Internet are not separately compensated, since, as a general rule, they are included in the price of legal services provided. Clause 15 of Resolution No. 1.

The Supreme Court also noted that if the payment for the accommodation or services of the representative was made after the final decision on the case was made, then the winning party has the right to go to court again with an application for compensation of such costs to p. 29 of Resolution No. 1.

Proportional cost recovery: when this rule does not apply

In civil and arbitration process the following rule applies - if the claim is satisfied in part, then the court costs are awarded h. 1 tbsp. 98 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation; h. 1 tbsp. 110 APC RF:

  • to the plaintiff - in proportion to the size of the satisfied claims;
  • to the defendant - in proportion to the part of the requirements in which the plaintiff was denied.

Indeed, in this case, both parties to the dispute are somewhat better off.

V administrative process this rule only works for foreclosure cases mandatory payments and sanctions h. 1 tbsp. 111 CAS RF.

So the BC indicated that this rule does not apply to and p. 21 of Resolution No. 1:

  • no claims property nature, including those claims that have a monetary value, but are aimed at protecting personal moral rights(e.g. claims for compensation moral harm);
  • claims of a property nature that cannot be assessed (for example, for the suppression of illegal actions);
  • claims for the recovery of a forfeit, which is reduced by the court in connection with the disproportionate consequences of the violation of the obligation or the receipt by the creditor of unjustified benefits.

Non-parties are also entitled to reimbursement of costs

According to the Supreme Court, third parties and interested parties (in the administrative process) who participated in the case on the winning side can also be reimbursed if their "actual procedural behavior contributed to the adoption" of the final decision

Reasonable limits of court costs in the framework of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court No. 1

S.V. Troitsky

The article reveals the effect of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court No. 1 dated 01.21.2016. Attention is focused on the main positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in matters of reimbursement of costs associated with the consideration of the case.

Keywords: legal costs, representative services, reasonableness of costs

For citation: MIEP Bulletin. 2016. No. 4 (25). S. 93-100.

Reimbursement of legal fees is an important institution the rule of law, ensuring the full restoration of violated rights, contributing to the restoration of order in public administration stimulating the parties to pre-trial (out-of-court) settlement of disputes (including tax ones) and fair procedural behavior, allowing to reduce the workload on judges and, as a result, improve the quality of justice.

In this regard, this institution has constitutional significance, since the legal reimbursement of legal costs incurred in court to restore the violated right ensures the implementation of:

♦ constitutional law for compensation for harm caused by illegal actions (inaction) of bodies state power(Article 53 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation).

Based on the interpretation of the definitions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of June 24, 2014 No. 1469-O and of January 19, 2010 No. 88-O-O, the definition of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated March 05, 2007 No. 838/07 in case No. A41-K1-3753 / 06, Institute legal costs can be attributed to the subinstitution (variety) of losses.

Troitsky Sergey Vladimirovich - candidate legal sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of State and Legal Disciplines International Institute Economics and Law, expert at MGIMO (U) MFA of Russia, member of the Russian Association of International Law. Correspondence address: [email protected].

Confirmation of this point of view can be found in judicial practice1.

Attempts to establish a reasonableness limit for such expenses were made in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated January 21, 2016 No. 1 "On some issues of the application of legislation on reimbursement of costs associated with the consideration of the case" (hereinafter - Resolution No. 1) 2. As noted in clause 11 of Resolution No. 1, when resolving the issue of the amount of amounts recovered in reimbursement of legal costs, the court has no right to reduce it arbitrarily, unless the other party states an objection and does not provide evidence of the excessive costs recovered from it. At the same time, the court has the right to reduce the amount of legal costs, including the costs of paying for the services of a representative, if the amount of costs declared for recovery, based on the evidence in the case, is clearly unreasonable (excessive) in nature (paragraph 2, paragraph 11 of Resolution No. 1) ...

Even if there is unconditional evidence of payment for the representative's services, this is not a sufficient reason for not reducing the amount spent on the representative if the court considers it excessive. Currently, the courts most often arbitrarily reduce the costs of the services of representatives, which must be compensated by the losing party. Sometimes such a decrease leads to the fact that the court reduces the amount for the services of representatives to a size that does not reach the average market rates, which is often manifested in the decisions of the Lyubertsy City Court of the Moscow Region and the rulings of the Moscow regional court.

I would like to note that even if the loser claims excessive expenses, he either does not present arguments and arguments in his favor, or this is not reflected (or hardly reflected) in the judicial act. This explains the fact that the courts, which enjoy the “presumption” of lower court costs, never disclose the reasons why they do so. In this case, the courts follow the logic: the less reasoning and value judgments in a judicial act, the fewer controversial issues, which means the less the risk of canceling such an act.

1 Order of the Fourth Arbitration appellate court dated September 16, 2015 No. 04AP-4585/2015 in case No. A19-4991 / 2015; dated 10.09.2015 No. 04AP-2125/2015 in case No. A58-8525 / 2014; dated 01.09.2015 No. 04AP-3492/2015 in case No. A19-18343 / 2014; dated July 24, 2015 No. 04AP-3473/2015 in case No. A19-5115 / 2015, etc.

2 Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated January 21, 2016 No. 1 "On some issues of the application of legislation on reimbursement of costs associated with the consideration of the case" // Russian newspaper... 2016.27 Feb.

Speaking about reducing the amount of legal costs, taking into account the interpretation of paragraph 11 of Resolution No. 1, it is worth noting that arbitrage practice developed the criteria by which the courts should be guided when determining the amount of legal costs.

According to the legal position The Constitutional Court RF, formulated in the Definition of December 21, 2004 No. 454-03, and Art. 100 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, when considering an application for reimbursement of expenses for the services of representatives, the nature of the dispute in question, the complexity of the case, the duration, the number of court hearings with the participation of the representative, the nature and volume of additional legal services since reasonable size is an estimated category and in each specific case the court must examine the circumstances related to the participation of the representative in the dispute. The legal positions set out in this definition remain valid, which has been repeatedly confirmed by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation4.

At the same time, according to the Decision of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated 09.29.2015 No. 2032-05 in order to create a mechanism for the effective restoration of violated rights and taking into account the principle of maximum protection of property interests of a person declaring justified claims, whose rights and freedoms have been harmed, Civil procedural code The RF provides for the procedure for the distribution of court costs between the parties.

It can also be argued that there are no guidelines for a clear definition of the assessment of the reasonableness of costs for the services of representatives, which leads to the fact that many judges compare legal costs with their own salaries, assess not the reasonable amount of legal costs, but the professional actions of the lawyers chosen by the client. In these circumstances, double standards are manifested, since itself

3 Determination of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of December 21, 2004 No. 454 "On refusal to accept for consideration the complaint of a limited liability company" Trust "for violation of constitutional rights and freedoms by part 2 of Article 110 of the Arbitration Procedure Code Russian Federation».

4 Definitions of March 29, 2016 No. 677-O, of March 29, 2016 No. 653-O, of March 29, 2016 No. 677-O, of December 22, 2015 No. 2824-O, of July 16, 2009 No. 717-OO, of February 25. 2010 No. 224-O-O, dated March 22, 2012 No. 535-O-O, dated December 23, 2014 No. 2777-O, etc.

5 Determination of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated 09.29.2015 No. 2032-O "On refusal to accept for consideration the complaint of citizen Yuri Anatolyevich Godov on violation of his constitutional rights by part one of Article 98 and part one of Article 100 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation."

the state in one case is ready to generously pay for disputes with its participation, which is confirmed by a tender for the provision of legal services for 314,700,000 rubles. in a dispute with a subsidiary of Exxon Mobil, which through the Stockholm court is trying to return 500 million dollars in taxes paid in Russia, in another - a reasonable amount is determined subjectively, without taking into account the volume and complexity of the case and does not exceed an average of 20 thousand rubles .6

At the same time, in judicial practice there were decisions where court costs were reasonably collected on a representative in the amount of RUB 143,123,498.7

The attempt made by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in Resolution No. 1 to determine the criteria for reasonable limits of reimbursable costs for the payment of the representative's services also turned out to be unsuccessful, since the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation brought together all the explanations previously formulated by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation, while not weakening, but strengthening subjectively -appraisal approach of the court in the application of Part 2 of Art. 110 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and Art. 100 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.

The inability of the clarifications formulated by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation to ensure the constitutional application of Part 2 of Art. 110 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and Art. 100 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation is due to the fundamental unsuitability of the traditionally used by courts approach to determining a reasonable amount of court costs - "calculation", the essence of which is to determine the minimum possible amount of costs for legal representation from the position of the judge considering the case.

As a result, notwithstanding paragraph 13 of Resolution No. 1, “reasonable costs for the services of a representative are considered to be such costs for the services of a representative, which, under comparable circumstances, are usually charged for similar services. When determining the reasonableness, the volume of the stated claims, the cost of the claim, the complexity of the case, the volume of services provided by the representative, the time it takes to prepare the procedural documents, the duration of the consideration of the case and other circumstances may be taken into account. " A stable

6 Determination of the panel of judges for civil affairs Of the Moscow Regional Court of 10.02.2016 in case No. 33-3664 / 2016, determination The Supreme Court RF of 30.05.2016 No. 4-KF16-1001, decision of the Lyubertsy City Court of the Moscow Region in case No. 2-8735 / 15 of 05.10.2015.

7 Ruling of the Moscow Arbitration Court dated 25.05.2015 in case No. А40-77050 / 11.

a practice according to which a reasonable cost limit is considered the minimum possible, from the point of view of the judge, the amount of legal representation costs, which is determined on the basis of the minimum fees of any lawyers and law firms in the region of rendering services, regardless of their experience, specialization and reputation in the legal services market.

Obviously, this approach and the practice of applying Part 2 of Art. 110 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and Art. 100 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, in principle, do not allow to ensure the practical implementation of constitutional principles, rights and guarantees of a person forced to protect them in judicial procedure since this person will always bear the uncompensated legal costs of restoring the violated right. And the amount of the corresponding non-reimbursable expenses depends on the subjective discretion of the particular judge considering the case.

In judicial acts on cases of reimbursement of legal costs, the courts indicate the high (in the opinion of the judge) rates of the person providing legal services, the excessive volume of services rendered, "extra" services "of the representative, which could be dispensed with.

This interpretation of Part 2 of Art. 110 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and Art. 100 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation directs a person defending his rights in court to contact those representatives who are ready to provide services at a minimum price and in a minimum volume. But such a benchmark reduces the constitutional guarantees for effective judicial protection rights private property(Part 1 of Art. 35 and Part 1 of Art. 48 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation).

Such a benchmark leads to a comparison of prices for the services of incomparable performers (representatives), i.e. with various qualifications, experience (which is reflected in the reputation of the performer in the service market). Such actions are unacceptable, since they imply an assessment by the court of the advisability of choosing a representative, which is contrary to the law8.

I believe that the established judicial practice of applying Part 2 of Art. 110 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and Art. 100 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and clarifications of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation do not allow for the practical implementation of:

8 Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of February 24, 2004 No. 3-P; Definitions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated 04.06.2007 No. 320-О-P and No. 366-О-P.

♦ the constitutional principle of legal protection of private property (part 1 of article 35 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation);

♦ a constitutional guarantee for obtaining qualified legal assistance (part 1 of article 48 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation);

♦ the constitutional right to compensation for harm caused by illegal actions (inaction) of public authorities (Article 53 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation);

♦ constitutional guarantees ensuring the provision of legal aid in criminal and civil cases;

♦ constitutional principles of legal equality of all before the law and court, legal certainty, reasonable expectations and trust in the state (part 1 of article 19, part 1 of article 120 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation).

For the practical implementation of the aforementioned constitutional principles, rights and guarantees, it is necessary that when limiting the amount of reimbursable expenses, the courts should be guided by a clear definition of the concept of “reasonable limit of expenses”. but this concept does not have a normative definition, i.e. is evaluative. This creates legal uncertainty and hinders the practical implementation of the above constitutional principles. Non-uniform application of the norm by the courts violates constitutional principles legal equality of all before the law and the court, legal certainty, reasonable expectations and trust in the state (part 1 of article 19, part 1 of article 120 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation). These principles have been repeatedly defended by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation9.

In this regard, the courts, when determining the amount of reimbursable expenses for the payment of the representative's services, should be guided by the principles of reasonableness and fairness, taking into account the amount of work done by the representative, the degree of complexity of the case, the duration of its consideration, comparison of similar services, which is consistent with the positions set out in a number of Appellate rulings10 ...

9 Resolutions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated 20.04.2009 No. 7-P, dated 06.12.2011 No. 27-P, dated 29.06.2012 No. 16-P, dated 14.05.2013 No. 9-P, dated 31.03.2015 No. 6-P and dr.

10 Appeal determination of Krasnodar regional court from 22.09.2015 in case No. 33-22274 / 2015, ruling of the Orenburg Regional Court dated 04.09.2014 in case No. 33-5470 / 2014, Appeal ruling of the Tambov Regional Court dated 17.12.2012 in case No. 33-3411 / 2012, ruling Primorsky Regional Court dated September 16, 2015 in case No. 33-8153 / 2015, Appeal ruling of the Moscow City Court dated August 14, 2015 in case No. 33-27756 / 15, 2-3939 / 14, Appeal

Also, when recovering the costs of paying for the services of a representative incurred by the person in favor of whom the judicial act was adopted, the court is obliged to create conditions under which the necessary balance of procedural rights and obligations of the parties would be observed, which was repeatedly stated by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation11.

Literature

1. Samodurov D.I. People's law-making initiative as a form of participation of residents of the city of Moscow in the management of the metropolitan metropolis // Vedomosti of the Moscow City Duma. 2014. No. 1. S. 59-62.

2. Galiev R.S. Legal and regulatory framework implementation public control for the activities of bodies local government in the city of Barnaul // Actual problems fight against crimes and other offenses. 2014. No. 12-2. S. 76-77.

3. Prokhorov Yu.V. Financial control as a form of state power // Bulletin of the International Institute of Economics and Law. 2013. No. 3. S. 65-72.

4. Troitsky S.V., Kalamkaryan R.A., Andreev A.F., Samodurov D.I., Galiev R.S., Rudenko V.V., Yusupov M.R. International Cooperation in Combating Crime: A Textbook for Academic Bachelor's Degree. M., 2016.349 p.

5. Lyakhov E.G., Badalina M.B., Troitsky S.V. Some issues of international cooperation of states in combating crime (problems of forming a conceptual apparatus) // International law. 2010.Vol. 44.No. 4, p. 35.

Reasonable limits of court costs in the framework of the Resolution of Plenum of Supreme court No. 1 of 21 January 2016

Troitskiy Sergey - Candidate of Juridical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of state and legal disciplines of the International Institute of Economics

ruling of the Supreme Court of the Altai Republic dated 05.08.2015 in case No. 33732/2015, Appeal ruling of the Tambov Regional Court dated 05.08.2015 in case No. 33-2295 / 2015, Appellate ruling of the Arkhangelsk Regional Court dd. 13.07.2015 in case No. 33-3275 / 2015.

11 Determinations of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of 20.10.2005 No. 355-O and of 25.02.2010 No. 224-O-O.

and Law, Expert of MGIMO (University) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia, Member of Russian Association of International Law Address for correspondence: [email protected]

The article reveals the effect of the Resolution of Plenum of the Supreme Court No. 1 of 01.21.2016 and focuses on the basic positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in payment of the costs of the proceedings.

Key words: court costs, services of a representative, the reasonableness of the expenses

For citation: Herald of International Institute of Economics and Law. 2016. N 4 (25). P. 93-100.

PLENUM OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

RESOLUTION

ABOUT SOME QUESTIONS

APPLICATION OF COST REFUND LEGISLATION,

RELATED TO THE CONSIDERATION OF THE CASE

In order to ensure the unity of the practice of the courts' application of legislation governing the procedure for reimbursing court costs in civil, administrative cases, economic disputes, the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, guided by Article 126 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, Articles 2 and 5 of the Federal Constitutional Law of February 5, 2014 N 3- FKZ "On the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation", decides to give the following clarifications:

1. Legal expenses, consisting of state duty, as well as the costs associated with the consideration of the case (hereinafter referred to as legal costs), represent monetary costs (losses) distributed in the manner prescribed by Chapter 7 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation), Chapter 10 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the CAS RF), Chapter 9 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the APC RF).

Within the meaning of the aforementioned legal provisions, the principle of distribution of court costs is the reimbursement of court costs to the person who incurred them, at the expense of the person not in whose favor the final judicial act in the case was adopted (for example, a decision of the court of first instance, a ruling on the termination of proceedings on the case or on leaving applications without consideration, a judicial act of the court of appeal, cassation, supervisory instance, which completed the proceedings on the case at the appropriate stage of the process).

2. Legal costs include costs incurred by persons participating in the case, including third parties interested in administrative affairs(article 94 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, article 106 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, article 106 of the CAS RF).

The list of legal costs provided for by these codes is not exhaustive. So, the costs incurred by the plaintiff, the administrative plaintiff, the applicant (hereinafter also - the plaintiffs) in connection with the collection of evidence before the presentation of the statement of claim, the administrative statement of claim, the statement (hereinafter also - the claims) to the court can be recognized as legal costs if the incurring such expenses were necessary for the exercise of the right to go to court and the evidence collected before filing the claim meets the requirements of relevance and admissibility. For example, the plaintiff may be reimbursed for the costs associated with the legalization of foreign official documents, the provision by a notary of judicial evidence (in particular, evidence confirming the placement of certain information on the Internet) by a notary, on the basis of which the price of the claim filed with the court and its jurisdiction were subsequently determined.

The costs of issuing a power of attorney for a representative can also be recognized as legal costs if such a power of attorney is issued for the participation of a representative in a specific case or a specific court session in the case.

3. Expenses arising from the consideration, resolution and settlement of a dispute out of court (appeal in the order of subordination, mediation procedure) are not legal costs and are not reimbursed in accordance with the norms of Chapter 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Chapter 10 of the CAS RF, Chapter 9 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.

4. In cases when a law or an agreement provides for a claim or other mandatory pre-trial order settlement of a dispute, costs caused by compliance with this procedure (for example, costs for sending a claim to a counterparty, for preparing a report on real estate appraisal when challenging the results of determining the cadastral value of a property by a legal entity, for appealing to a higher tax authority against acts of tax authorities of a non-normative nature, actions or inaction their officials), including the costs of paying for legal services, are recognized as legal costs and are subject to reimbursement based on the fact that the plaintiff did not have the opportunity to exercise the right to go to court without incurring such costs (Articles 94, 135 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Articles 106, 129 CAS RF, Articles 106, 148 APC RF).

5. When a claim is filed jointly by several plaintiffs or against several defendants (procedural complicity), the distribution of legal costs is made taking into account the peculiarities of the material legal relationship from which the dispute arose, and the actual procedural behavior of each of them (Article 40 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Article 41 of the CAS RF, Article 46 of the APC RF).

If the persons who are not in favor of whom the judicial act has been adopted are joint debtors or creditors, the legal costs shall be reimbursed by these persons on a joint basis (part 4 of article 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, part 4 of article 2 of the CAS RF, part 5 of article 3 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, article 323, 1080 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter - the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

6. Legal costs incurred by third parties (Articles 42, 43 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Articles 50, 51 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation), interested parties (Article 47KAS RF) who participated in the case on the side in favor of which the final judicial act in the case was adopted may be reimbursed to these persons on the basis that their actual procedural behavior contributed to the acceptance of this judicial act.

At the same time, the possibility of recovering legal costs in favor of the named persons does not depend on whether they entered the process on their own initiative or were involved in the case at the request of a party or at the initiative of the court.

7. Persons who did not participate in the case, about whose rights and obligations the court adopted a judicial act, persons whose rights, freedoms and legitimate interests are violated by a judicial act, when appealing these judicial acts, enjoy the rights and perform the duties of persons participating in the case, in including those related to reimbursement of legal costs (Part 3 of Article 320, Part 1 of Article 376, Part 1 of Article 391.1 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Part 2 of Article 295, Part 1 of Article 318, Part 1 of Article 332, Part 1 of Article 346 of the CAS RF, Article 42 of the APC RF).

8. Persons who have applied to the court with a collective administrative statement of claim or a statement in defense of rights and legitimate interests groups of people enjoy procedural rights the plaintiff. Such persons, subject to their actual participation in the consideration of the case, based on the results of which a decision was made to satisfy the stated claims, have the right to reimbursement of the legal costs incurred by them. In turn, legal costs are recovered from these persons in case of refusal to satisfy the relevant requirements (part 3 of article 42 of the CAS RF, part 1 of article 225.10, article 225.12 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation).

9. Transfer of the right, protected in court, in the order of universal or singular succession (inheritance, reorganization legal entity, transfer of ownership of the thing, assignment of the right of claim, etc.) entails the transfer of the right to compensation for legal costs, since the right to such compensation is not inextricably linked with the personality of the participant in the process (Articles 58, 382, ​​383, 1112 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). In this case, the court replaces the person participating in the case with his legal successor (article 44 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, article 44 of the CAS RF, article 48 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation).

The assignment of the right to reimbursement of legal costs as such is allowed not only after they have been awarded to the person participating in the case, but also during the period of consideration of the case by the court (Articles 382, ​​383, 388.1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). The conclusion of this agreement before the award of legal costs does not entail a procedural replacement of the person participating in the case and ceded the right to reimbursement of legal costs by his legal successor, since such a right arises and passes to the legal successor only at the time of the award of court costs in favor of the legal predecessor (paragraph 2 of Article 388.1 of the Civil Code RF).

The transfer of the right to reimbursement of legal costs in the manner of universal or singular succession is possible both to the persons participating in the case and to other persons.

10. The person claiming the recovery of legal costs must prove the fact of incurring them, as well as the connection between the incurred by the specified person costs and the case considered in court with his participation. Failure to prove these circumstances is the basis for refusal to reimburse legal costs.

11. When resolving the issue of the amount of the amounts recovered in reimbursement of legal costs, the court does not have the right to reduce it arbitrarily if the other party does not raise an objection and does not provide evidence of the excessive costs recovered from it (Part 3 of Article 111 of the APC RF, Part 4 of Article 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation , part 4 of article 2 of the CAS RF).

At the same time, in order to implement the task of fair public justice trial, ensuring the necessary balance of the procedural rights and obligations of the parties (Articles 2, 35 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Articles 3, 45 of the CAS RF, Articles 2, 41 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation), the court has the right to reduce the amount of legal costs, including the costs of paying for the services of a representative, if collection of the amount of costs, based on the evidence available in the case, is clearly unreasonable (excessive).

12. The costs of paying for the services of a representative incurred by the person in favor of whom the judicial act was adopted are recovered by the court from another person participating in the case, within reasonable limits (part 1 of article 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, article 112 of the CAS RF, part 2 of article 110 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation ).

In case of incomplete (partial) satisfaction of claims, the costs of payment for the services of a representative are awarded to each of the parties within reasonable limits and distributed in accordance with the rule on the proportional distribution of court costs (Articles 98, 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Articles 111, 112 of the CAS RF, Article 110 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation) ...

13. It should be considered reasonable that such expenses for the services of a representative, which, under comparable circumstances, are usually charged for similar services. When determining the reasonableness, the volume of the stated claims, the price of the claim, the complexity of the case, the volume of services provided by the representative, the time it takes to prepare the procedural documents, the duration of the consideration of the case and other circumstances may be taken into account.

The reasonableness of the legal costs for the payment of the representative's services cannot be justified by the knowledge of the representative of the person participating in the case.

14. Transportation costs and living expenses of a representative of a party shall be reimbursed by the other party to the dispute within reasonable limits based on the prices that are usually set for transportation services, as well as prices for services related to the provision of accommodation in the place (region) in which they are actually provided. (Articles 94, 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Articles 106, 112 of the CAS RF, Article 106, Part 2 of Article 110 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation).

15. The expenses of a representative necessary to fulfill his obligation to provide legal services, for example, expenses for familiarization with the case materials, for using the Internet, for mobile communications, for sending documents, are not subject additional compensation the other party to the dispute, since by virtue of Article 309.2 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, as a general rule, such expenses are included in the price of the services provided, unless otherwise follows from the terms of the contract (Part 1 Article 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Article 112 CAS RF, Part 2 Article 110 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation ).

16. The costs of payment for the services of representatives incurred by bodies and organizations (including societies for the protection of consumer rights), endowed by law with the right to go to court to protect the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of others (Articles 45, 46 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Articles 39, 40KAS RF, Articles 52, 53, 53.1 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the RF) are not subject to reimbursement, since this authority presupposes their independent participation in the trial without involving representatives on a reimbursable basis.

17. If several persons participating in the case on the same side dealt with the case through one representative, the costs of paying for his services are subject to reimbursement. general rules part 1 of article 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, article 112 of the CAS RF, part 2 of article 110 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in accordance with the actual expenses incurred by each of them.

18. Within the meaning of Articles 98, 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Articles 111, 112 of the CAS RF, Article 110 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, legal costs are reimbursed when the courts resolve substantive disputes. Since the consideration of cases provided for by chapters 28-30, 32-34, 36, 38 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, chapter 27 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, is aimed at establishing legal facts, determination of the legal status of persons involved in the case or the legal regime of the objects of law, and not for the resolution of a substantive legal dispute, the costs incurred in connection with the consideration of these categories of cases are attributed to the persons participating in the case who incurred them and did not are subject to distribution according to the rules of Chapter 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Chapter 10 of the CAS RF, Chapter 9 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.

19. The costs incurred in connection with the consideration of claims, the satisfaction of which is not conditional on the establishment of facts of violation or challenge of the plaintiff's rights by the defendant, the administrative defendant, for example, claims for divorce, if there is a mutual consent of the spouses, are not subject to distribution among the persons participating in the case. having minor children in common (paragraph 1 of Article 23 Family Code Russian Federation).

20. In case of incomplete (partial) satisfaction of property claims subject to assessment, legal costs are awarded to the plaintiff in proportion to the amount of the claims satisfied by the court, and to the defendant - in proportion to the part of the claims, which the plaintiff was denied (Articles 98, 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Articles 111, 112 CAS RF, article 110 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the RF).

21. Provisions procedural legislation on proportional compensation (distribution) of legal costs (Articles 98, 102, 103 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Article 111 of the CAS RF, Article 110 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation) shall not be applied upon permission:

a claim of a non-property nature, including a claim that has a monetary value, aimed at protecting personal non-property rights (for example, for compensation for moral damage);

a claim of a property nature that cannot be assessed (for example, for the suppression of actions that violate a right or create a threat of its violation);

claims for the recovery of a forfeit, which is reduced by the court due to the disproportionate consequences of the violation of the obligation, the receipt by the creditor of unjustified benefits (Article 333 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation);

claims subject to consideration in the manner prescribed by the CAS RF, with the exception of requirements for the collection of mandatory payments and sanctions (part 1 of Article 111 of the said code).

At the same time, the rule on proportional compensation (distribution) of court costs is applied in economic disputes arising from public legal relations related to challenging non-normative legal acts of tax, customs and other authorities, if the adoption of such acts imposes a property obligation on the applicant (Part 1 of Article 110 of the APC RF).

22. In the event of a change in the amount of claims after the initiation of proceedings in the case, with the proportional distribution of legal costs, one should proceed from the amount of claims supported by the plaintiff at the time of the decision on the case.

At the same time, the reduction by the plaintiff of the amount of claims as a result of the receipt during the consideration of the case of evidence of a clear unfoundedness of this amount may be recognized by the court as abuse of procedural rights and entail a refusal to recognize the legal costs incurred by the plaintiff as necessary in whole or in part (part 1 of Article 35 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, part 6 , 7 Article 45 of the CAS RF) or imposing on the plaintiff the legal costs incurred by the defendant (Article 111 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the RF).

23. The court has the right to set off the legal costs recovered in favor of each of the parties, and other amounts awarded to them as counterparts (Part 4 of Article 1, Article 138 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Part 4 of Article 2, Part 1 of Article 131 of the CAS RF, Part 5 of Article 3, part 3 of article 132 of the APC RF).

The offset of costs is made at the request of persons reimbursing such costs, or at the initiative of the court, which, based on the provisions of Article 56 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Article 62 of the CAS RF, Article 65 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, brings this issue up for discussion by the parties.

24. In case of partial satisfaction of both the initial and counter property claims, for which the proportional distribution of court costs is carried out, the plaintiff's legal costs for original claim are reimbursed in proportion to the amount of the satisfied claims. The legal costs of the plaintiff in the counterclaim shall be reimbursed in proportion to the amount of the satisfied counterclaims.

25. In cases of termination of the proceedings on the case, leaving the application without consideration, court costs are recovered from the plaintiff.

At the same time, if the proceedings in the case were terminated due to the death of a citizen or the liquidation of a legal entity that was a party to the case, or statement of claim left without consideration due to the fact that it was filed by an incapacitated person or due to the failure of the parties who did not ask for the hearing in their absence to appear in court on a secondary summons (paragraph seven of Article 222 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation), legal costs incurred by the persons participating in the case, are not subject to distribution according to the rules of Chapter 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Chapter 10 of the CAS RF, Chapter 9 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.

In the event that the statement of claim was left without consideration due to the fact that it was signed and filed by a person who does not have the authority to sign and (or) submit it, or signed by a person, official position which is not specified, legal costs incurred by the participants in the proceedings in connection with the filing of such an application shall be recovered from this person.

26. Upon termination of the proceedings due to the refusal of the plaintiff from the claim in connection with the voluntary satisfaction of his claims by the defendant, after the plaintiff goes to court, legal costs are recovered from the defendant (Part 1 of Article 101 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Part 1 of Article 113 of the CAS RF, Article 110 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation) ...

It should be borne in mind that the refusal of the claim is the right, and not the obligation of the plaintiff, therefore, the reimbursement of legal costs to the plaintiff under these circumstances cannot be made dependent on the statement by him of the refusal of the claim. Consequently, in the case of voluntary satisfaction of claims by the defendant after the plaintiff's appeal to the court and acceptance judgment in such a case, legal costs are also subject to recovery from the defendant.

27. When concluding an amicable agreement, a conciliation agreement, legal costs are allocated in accordance with its terms. In the event that in the amicable agreement, the agreement on conciliation, the parties did not provide for the conditions for the distribution of legal costs, the court resolves this issue taking into account the following.

The conclusion of an amicable agreement, an agreement on conciliation is conditioned by mutual concessions of the parties, and the termination of proceedings in the case due to this circumstance does not in itself indicate the acceptance of a judicial act in favor of one of the parties to the dispute. Therefore, legal costs incurred by the parties during the consideration of the case before they conclude a settlement agreement, an agreement on conciliation, are attributed to them and are not subject to distribution.

At the same time, legal costs incurred by the court in connection with the consideration of the case at the expense of the corresponding budget budgetary system Of the Russian Federation (article 103 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, article 114 of the CAS RF), the sums of money to be paid to witnesses, experts, specialists are distributed by the court, including on its initiative, between the parties equally by issuing a determination (part 2 of article 101 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, part 2 of article 113 of the CAS RF).

28. After the adoption of the final judicial act on the case, the person participating in the case has the right to apply to the court with a statement on the issue of legal costs incurred in connection with the consideration of the case, the compensation of which was not declared during its consideration.

Such an issue is resolved by the court in a court session in accordance with the rules provided for by article 166 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, article 154 of the CAS RF, article 159 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. Based on the results of his permission, a determination is made.

When considering an application on the issue of legal costs, the court also resolves questions about the distribution of legal costs associated with the consideration of this application. In view of this, an application for reimbursement of legal costs incurred in connection with the examination of an application for legal costs, filed after the decision on the issue of legal costs has been issued, is not subject to admission and consideration by the court.

29. If the legal costs associated with the consideration of the dispute on the merits were actually incurred after the adoption of the final judicial act on the case (for example, payment for accommodation, services of a representative was made after the resolution of the case on the merits), the person participating in the case has the right to apply to the court with a statement on the issue of such costs.

The court refuses to accept for proceedings or terminates proceedings in relation to the statement of legal costs, the issue of compensation or refusal of compensation for which was resolved in a previously issued judicial act, in relation to paragraph 2 of part 1 of article 134, paragraph three of article 220 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Clause 4 of Part 1 of Article 128, Clause 2 of Part 1 of Article 194 of the CAS RF, Clause 2 of Part 1 of Article 150 of the APC RF.

30. A person who has filed an appeal, cassation or supervisory complaint, as well as other persons who actually participated in the consideration of the case at the relevant stage of the process, but did not file a complaint, have the right to reimbursement of legal costs incurred in connection with the consideration of the complaint, if based on the results of the consideration of the case, a final judicial act was adopted in their favor.

In turn, from the person who filed an appeal, cassation or supervisory complaint, the satisfaction of which was denied, the costs of other participants in the process related to the consideration of the complaint may be recovered.

The costs incurred in connection with the revision of a judicial act that has entered into legal force due to new or newly discovered circumstances are reimbursed to the participants in the process, based on which side of the dispute was adopted by the final judicial act in the relevant case.

The costs incurred by the participants in the proceedings are subject to reimbursement, provided that they were due to their actual procedural behavior at the stage of the consideration of the case by the court of appeal, cassation or supervisory instance, at the stage of revision of a judicial act that has entered into legal force due to new or newly discovered circumstances.

31. Legal costs incurred by the recoverer at the stage of execution of the court decision related to participation in court hearings to consider the debtor's applications for a deferral, on the installment plan for the execution of the court decision, on changing the method and procedure for its execution, are reimbursed by the debtor (Articles 98, 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Articles 111, 112 of the CAS RF, article 110 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the RF).

32. Persons participating in the case must conscientiously exercise all their procedural rights, in connection with which the court has the right to attribute legal costs to the person who has abused his procedural rights and has not fulfilled his procedural duties, or does not recognize the legal costs incurred by him as necessary, if it led to a breakdown court session, delaying the trial, obstructing the consideration of the case and the adoption of the final judicial act.

33. In connection with the adoption of this resolution, to recognize as not applicable:

clause 33 of the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation of February 17, 2011 N 12 "On some issues of the application of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation as amended Federal law dated 27.07.2010 N 228-FZ "On Amendments to the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation";

paragraph three of clause 6 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated July 18, 2014 N 51 "On some issues arising in the consideration of disputes involving organizations that collectively manage copyright and related rights."

Chief Justice of the Supreme Court

Russian Federation

V.M. LEBEDEV

Secretary of the Plenum,

Supreme Court judge

Russian Federation

Ironically, it was paragraph 33 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the RF Armed Forces No. 1 of January 21, 2016 "On some issues of the application of legislation on reimbursement of costs associated with the consideration of the case" that paragraph 33 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation No. 12 dated February 17, 2011, which allowed the collection of costs, was canceled incurred by a party when considering an application for the distribution of court costs.

The story begins with the resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation No. 16693/11 of 04/10/2012, when the defendant, having won the case, applied to the court with a statement on the distribution of court costs, in which he asked to attribute to the plaintiff 30,000 rubles of expenses for payment of the representative's services. The court satisfied the application, but the plaintiff challenged it in court appellate instance... In the appeal, the defendant filed a petition for the assignment of another 10,000 rubles of expenses for the payment of the services of a person representing interests in the court of appeal on the application for the distribution of court costs. The appeal was denied, indicating that the costs had already been allocated. The appeal supported.

Referring the case for a new consideration, the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation indicated that "within the meaning of the rules of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the right to reimbursement of legal costs applies not only to costs directly related to the consideration of the dispute, but also to court costs incurred by the person participating in the case in connection with consideration arbitration court statements, petitions and the performance of certain procedural actions. The consideration by the court of applications for the distribution of court costs is no exception. "

Subsequently, by the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation of 12.07.2012 No. 43, a similar rule was added to the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation of 17.02.2011 No. 12 (clause 33). Now this provision is not applicable due to the legal position of the Plenum of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation No. 1 dated January 21, 2016.

On the one hand, allowing for the collection of expenses for the consideration of an application for the distribution of expenses, the question arises of the possibility of repeatedly submitting an application for the distribution of expenses incurred in considering the issue of "expenses for expenses", etc. taking into account the application of Part 2 of Art. 112 APC RF.

On the other hand, court expenses for payment of services of representatives in some cases are significant, for example, in the case of Aelita Softvea (No. А40-20664 / 08) 2.8 million rubles were collected, in the case of Khlebozavod No. 6 (No. А40-71609 / 10) 25 million rubles were collected, in the case of BILLA (No. А40-35715 / 10) 121,264.09 US dollars and 28.8 million rubles were collected. The collection of such expenses is comparable to a full-fledged court case: several meetings, collection and presentation of evidence of reasonableness of expenses, etc. Involvement of the same representatives in trial on the distribution of costs will inevitably entail additional costs that the party will not be able to reimburse in the future. In this sense, it will bear unfavorable consequences, which is probably not entirely correct.

Maybe it was worthwhile to somehow soften this issue, for example, by introducing into paragraph 33 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation No. 12 dated February 17, 2011, a restriction on a repeated statement on the distribution of court costs?