Judge T.V. Chernysheva Case No. 33-31097/2014

APPEAL DECISION

Judicial panel for civil cases Moscow City Court composed of:

Chairman Gerbekov B.I.,

Judges Lashkova A.N., Artyukhova G.M.,

with the participation of prosecutor Samoilova I.S.,

under secretary O.A. Ilyutkina

reviewed in the open court hearing according to the report of judge A.N. Lashkov civil case based on the appeal of V.V. Alekseev, acting in his own interests and in the interests of the minor children of A.V. Alekseev. and Alekseeva E.V. on the decision of the Babushkinsky District Court of Moscow dated December 23, 2013, which decided:

Collect from Ohanyan Y.N. in favor of Alekseev V.V. _ rub. - cost of crutches, _ rub. To compensate for moral damage, the rest of the claims will be rejected.

In the claim to Alekseev V.V. to refuse compensation for damages to Rosgosstrakh LLC,

installed:

Alekseev V.V., acting in his own interests and in the interests of minor children Alekseev A.V., b. and Alekseeva E.V., b. filed a lawsuit against Y.N. Oganyan, Rosgosstrakh LLC for compensation for material and moral damage.

The claims are motivated by the fact that on April 27, 2013. defendant Ohanyan Y.N., driving a car "_" license plate number _, violating Rules traffic of the Russian Federation, hit the plaintiff’s minor son A.V. Alekseev, b. crossed the roadway on an unregulated surface pedestrian crossing"zebra". As a result of the collision, Alekseev A.V. bodily harm was caused moderate severity as _, _ . After the collision, the victim was taken to _, transferred to the department of traumatology and disaster medicine _, where he was hospitalized until May 7, 2013.

After removing the plaster from Alekseev A.V. discovered _, minor Alekseev A.V. was again hospitalized in _, where he was treated as an inpatient from 06/10/2013 to 06/20/2013.

Defendant Oganyan Y.N. was found guilty of committing an administrative offense under Part _ Art. _ Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, appointed administrative punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to drive vehicles for a period of _ and _ months.

Plaintiff Alekseev V.V. indicated that the minor Alekseev A.V. as a result of being hit by a vehicle, I experienced physical pain and severe psychological stress until the end school year I couldn’t go to school, I couldn’t go on summer vacation.

At the time of the accident with the minor Alekseev A.V. his sister Alekseeva E.V. was there, after the blow he received, his brother practically fell into her arms; After the incident, the plaintiff’s daughter experienced severe stress, cried for a long time, and could not sleep peacefully for several nights.

Plaintiff Alekseev V.V. is a disabled person of the _ group, as a result of the incident he experienced severe stress and anxiety, which are contraindicated for him for health reasons.

In connection with the above, the plaintiff asked the court to recover from the defendant material damages in the form of expenses for the purchase of crutches in the amount of _ rubles, to recover compensation for moral damages in favor of the minor Alekseev A.V. in the amount of _ rub., in favor of minor Alekseeva E.V. _ rub., in your favor _ rub.

Defendant Oganyan Y.N. and her representative recognized the claim for compensation for moral damage in the amount of _ rub. in favor of the minor Alekseev A.V., as well as compensation for purchased crutches in the amount of _ rubles, the remaining stated demands were asked to be refused.

The representative of the defendant, Rosgosstrakh LLC, was notified, did not appear at the court hearing, and did not present any objections.

The court made the above decision dated December 23, 2013, the cancellation of which is requested by V.V. Alekseev, acting in his own interests and in the interests of the minor children of A.V. Alekseev, E.V. Alekseeva, based on the arguments appeal, in which he pointed out the disproportionality of the amount of compensation for moral damage determined by the court.

By the appeal ruling of the judicial panel for civil cases of the Moscow City Court dated April 2, 2014, the said decision of the district court was canceled in terms of the refusal of V.V. Alekseev, acting for himself and the minor Alekseeva Ekaterina Vladimirovna, in a claim for the recovery of compensation for moral damage, and a new ruling was made a decision by which the claim is partially satisfied. The same decision regarding the amount of compensation for moral damage to A.V. Alekseev. changed.

By a resolution of the Presidium of the Moscow City Court dated August 15, 2014, the appeal ruling of the judicial panel dated April 2, 2014 was canceled due to violation of the rules procedural law, and the case was sent for a new appeal hearing.

At the meeting of the judicial panel, the defendant and her representative, by proxy, Kuznetsova N.V. appeared and asked to leave the court decision unchanged.

Plaintiff V.V. Alekseev, acting in his own interests and the interests of the minor A.V. Alekseevs. and E.V., appeared at the meeting of the judicial panel and supported the arguments of the appeal.

The representative of the defendant LLC "Rosgosstrakh" was notified, the court appellate court did not appear, and therefore the judicial panel finds it possible to consider the case in his absence.

Having checked the case materials, listened to the explanations of the parties who appeared, discussed the arguments of the appeal, the defendant’s objection to the arguments of the appeal, the conclusion of the prosecutor who considered the court decision subject to cancellation in terms of compensation for moral damage in favor of V.V. Alekseev, acting in his own interests and the interests of the minor Alekseeva E.V., and a change in terms of compensation for moral damage in favor of Alekseev A.V. for the following reasons.

When considering the case, the court of first instance established that on April 27, 2013. defendant Oganyan Ya.N., driving a car "_" license plate _, moving along _, hit the minor Alekseev A.V., born _, who, together with his minor sister Alekseeva E.V. crossed the roadway at an unregulated zebra crossing; as a result of the collision with Alekseev A.V. were caused: _, _, in connection with which in _ Alekseev A.V. was undergoing treatment initially from April 27, 2013. to 05/07/2013, and subsequently from 06/10/2013. until June 20, 2013 with a diagnosis: _ . According to the expert's conclusion _ N_ Alekseev V.V. moderate damage to health was caused.

By the decision of the judge of the Babushkinsky District Court of Moscow dated September 5, 2013. Ohanyan Ya.N. attracted to administrative responsibility according to Part _ Art. _ Code of Administrative Offenses for violation Traffic rules resulting in the infliction of moderate harm to the health of the victim, in the form of deprivation of the right to drive vehicle for a period of _ and _ months.

Resolving the stated requirements, the court of first instance came to the correct conclusion that the defendant Ohanyan Y.N., as the owner of the source increased danger, in accordance with Art. Art. 1079, 1100 Civil Code The Russian Federation is obliged to compensate the victim for moral damage in connection with the infliction of harm to health of moderate severity as a result of a traffic accident.

In accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 151 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, if a citizen has suffered moral harm (physical or moral suffering) by actions that violate his personal moral rights or encroaching on others belonging to a citizen intangible benefits, as well as in other cases, provided by law, the court may impose an obligation on the offender monetary compensation the specified harm.

According to paragraph 1 of Art. 1100 Civil Code Russian Federation compensation for moral damage is carried out regardless of the guilt of the harm-cauter in the case where harm is caused to the life or health of a citizen as a result of the action of a source of increased danger.

The conclusions of the court of first instance about the defendant's liability are consistent with the legal position set forth by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in Ruling No. 816-O-O dated May 19, 2009, according to which Civil Code of the Russian Federation establishes as general rule that liability for causing harm is based on the principles of guilt: according to paragraph 2 of Article 1064, the person who caused the harm is exempt from compensation if he proves that the harm was caused not through his fault.

By virtue of Part 1 of Art. 20, part 1 art. 41 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the state is obliged to respect data constitutional rights and their protection by law. In civil legislation, life and health are considered as inalienable and non-transferable intangible benefits that belong to a citizen from birth (clause 1 of Article 150 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

When determining the amount of compensation for moral damage, the court was guided by the provisions of Articles 151, 1101 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, while determining the amount of compensation for moral damage in favor of the minor Alekseev A.V. in the amount of _ rub. for the physical and moral suffering suffered, the length of time the child was undergoing treatment, and also took into account the fact that the defendant is a pensioner, currently works _, has an income of _ rubles.

Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in paragraph 8 of the Resolution of the Plenum “On some issues of application of legislation on compensation for moral damage” No. 10 of December 20, 1994 (as amended) clarified that the degree of moral or physical suffering is assessed by the court taking into account the actual circumstances of the infliction of moral damage , individual characteristics of the victim and other specific circumstances indicating the severity of the suffering he suffered. The amount of compensation depends on the nature and extent of moral or physical suffering caused to the plaintiff, the degree of guilt of the defendant in each specific case, and other noteworthy circumstances.

In this case, the court should keep in mind that since the victim in connection with harm to his health in all cases experiences physical or moral suffering, the fact of causing him moral harm is assumed. In this case, only the amount of compensation for moral damage is subject to determination (clause 32 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated January 26, 2010 No. 1 “On the application by courts civil legislation regulating relations under obligations resulting from harm to the life or health of a citizen").

Thus, when determining the amount of compensation for moral damage, the court, taking into account the requirements of reasonableness and fairness, should proceed from the degree of moral or physical suffering associated with the individual characteristics of the person who suffered harm, the degree of guilt of the offender and other noteworthy circumstances of each case.

According to the panel of judges, the court of first instance did not fully take into account the degree and nature of the physical and moral suffering inflicted on the minor victim, and the amount determined by the court of first instance for compensation for moral damage in the amount of _ rubles is not fair.

As seen from the case materials, minor Alekseev A.V. suffered moderate damage to health, he was hospitalized twice, in specified period and subsequently, the child was limited in movement, for a long time he was forced to move with the help of crutches.

When determining the amount of compensation for moral damage, one should also take into account minor age the child, as well as the fact that moral and physical suffering occurred both at the time of the harm and subsequently during treatment, which was long-term; the minor suffered psychological trauma, severe stress; in addition, there was no fault of the victim himself in the traffic accident, since he was crossing the roadway at an unregulated zebra crossing; The defendant was found to be at fault in the accident.

Taking into account the above circumstances, the judicial panel considers it necessary to increase the amount of compensation for moral damage in favor of A.V. Alekseev. up to _ rub., considering the specified amount to be reasonable and fair, taking into account the degree of moral and physical suffering caused to the plaintiff, long periods of treatment, and other circumstances indicated earlier. This amount is consistent with the principles of the constitutional value of life, health and dignity of the individual (Articles 21, 53 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation), as well as with the principles of reasonableness and justice, which allow, on the one hand, maximum compensation for moral damage caused, on the other hand, not to allow unjust enrichment of the victim and not to place the person responsible for compensation for damage in an excessively difficult financial situation.

At the same time, according to the panel of judges, the court unreasonably refused to satisfy the claims for compensation for moral damages in favor of the minor Alekseeva E.V., who was an eyewitness to the incident, experienced severe stress, and subsequently experienced anxiety and lack of sleep.

The panel of judges finds the arguments of the plaintiff V.V. Alekseev convincing. on the right to compensation for moral damage, since the plaintiff is a disabled person of the group, as the father of a minor victim experienced a long period of moral suffering in connection with the injury to his minor son.

Code of Administrative Offenses The Russian Federation includes a spouse, parents, children, adoptive parents, adopted children, siblings, grandparents, and grandchildren as close relatives (Article 25.6).

In accordance with Article 151 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, if a citizen has suffered moral harm (physical and moral suffering) by actions that violate his personal non-property rights or encroach on other intangible benefits belonging to the citizen, as well as in other cases provided for by law, the court may impose the violator is obligated to provide monetary compensation for said damage.

It follows from this legal norm that each citizen, in the event of moral harm being caused to him, has the right to protect his rights and interests.

Systematic analysis of these articles of the Civil Code, Family Codes And Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian The Federation allows us to come to the conclusion that all close relatives have the right to compensation for moral damage.

Thus, each of the listed persons has the right to compensation for moral damage, provided that moral suffering has been caused to them. The transfer of the rights of the victim to only one of his close relatives cannot in itself be considered as a basis for depriving the rights of all other close relatives.

When considering the case, the court did not take into account that as a result of the accident committed by the defendant and the damage caused to health to a minor child plaintiff, he personally and his daughter suffered irreparable moral and physical suffering.

Arguments of the defendant's representative that Alekseev V.V. does not live with children, legal significance they do not have to resolve this case, since this fact does not indicate the loss of the latter’s family and kinship relationships with the children.

Under such circumstances, the judicial panel believes that the court decision in this part is subject to cancellation with the issuance of a new decision on recovery from the defendant Y.N. Oganyan. in favor of Alekseev V.V. and Alekseeva E.V. compensation for moral damage of _ rubles each.

When determining the amount of compensation for moral damage, the judicial panel took into account the documentary evidence presented in the case materials, confirming the financial situation of the defendant, the presence of a vehicle in use by the family.

Links of the defendant Ohanyan Y.N. on her low level of income, living with her husband, who is a pensioner, and with her daughter, who has no income and is undergoing training, in accordance with the rules of Article 56 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, which are not supported by acceptable and reliable evidence, and therefore cannot be grounds for a reduction amounts collected from the defendant.

In terms of recovery of material damage, the decision was not appealed.

In accordance with Art. 328 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, based on the results of consideration of appeals or presentations, the appellate court has the right to cancel or change the decision of the first instance court in whole or in part and make a new decision in the case.

Guided by Articles 328, 329 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the judicial panel,

determined:

The decision of the Babushkinsky District Court of Moscow dated December 23, 2013 was overturned regarding the refusal of V.V. Alekseev, acting for himself and the minor E.V. Alekseev, in a claim for compensation for moral damage.

Make a new decision in this part.

Collect from Ohanyan Y.N. in favor of Alekseeva V.V., Alekseeva E.V., compensation for moral damage of _ rubles in favor of each.

To change the decision of the Babushkinsky District Court of Moscow dated December 23, 2013 regarding the amount of compensation for moral damage recovered in favor of A.V. Alekseev.

Collect from Ohanyan Y.N. in favor of Alekseev A.V. compensation for moral damage in the amount of _ rubles.

In the rest of the decision of the Babushkinsky District Court of Moscow, the appeal of V.V. Alekseev is left unchanged. - without satisfaction.

Chairman.

Decision No. 2-11/2016 2-11/2016(2-806/2015;)~M-861/2015 2-806/2015 M-861/2015 dated March 3, 2016 in case No. 2-11/2016

SOLUTION

In the name of the Russian Federation

Krasnoyarsk district court Astrakhan region composed of judge Kamzenova E.B.

with the participation of Assistant Prosecutor of the Krasnoyarsk District K.E.I.

plaintiff Isalieva T.M. and her representative lawyer Y.N.A.

representative of the defendant MBOU "Novourusovskaya school" E.A.Yu.

defendants M.A.K. and J.S.Yu.

representative of the defendant M.A.K. lawyer I.K.P.

under secretary Ismukanova D.T.

Having considered the case at the court hearing on the claim of I.T.M. acting in the interests of the minor son of I.I.V. about recovery from MBOU “Novourusovskaya Secondary School”, M.A.K. and J.S.Yu. material damage and compensation for moral damage

INSTALLED:

I.T.M. in the interests of the minor son of I.I.V. filed a claim against the Novourusovskaya Secondary School and M.A.K. for the recovery of material damage in the amount of 38,979 rubles and compensation for moral damage in the amount of 500,000 rubles caused by damage to the child’s health.

During judicial trial in terms of compensation for material damage to I.T.M. increased the amount of the claim to 52,510 rubles. Also during the trial, the second parent (father) of the child, M.A.K., was brought into the case as a co-defendant. – J.S.Yu. The plaintiff also asks to recover from the defendants 19,000 rubles in compensation for expenses for the representative’s services.

I.T.M. and her representative supported the claim in full. The following was stated in support of the claim. DD.MM.YYYYy during the lesson, teacher T.K.G. left the classroom of the MBOU "Novourusovskaya Secondary School" because she was simultaneously teaching a lesson with another class. Student J.R.S. started acting up in class. I.I.V. reprimanded him. In response, J.R.S. started beating him, gave him a move (trips) and knocked him to the floor. I.I.V. fell and received a closed comminuted fracture of the diaphysis of the left tibia with displacement of fragments in the middle third. This bodily injury caused the child serious harm health, causing a significant permanent loss of general working capacity of at least one third. Damage to health caused the child severe physical and moral suffering. His treatment continues to this day. The child continues to experience pain. The damaged leg has become shorter than the healthy leg, and the child experiences lameness when walking. For this reason, curvature of the spine began. The child was exempted from physical education classes for a long time. And at present, he is deprived of the opportunity to play sports and engage in full physical activity. To treat the child, we were forced to incur material costs for the purchase of medicines, medical supplies, additional nutrition, payment for doctor consultations and tests. And also for the mother’s daily trips to the child when he was in the hospital. Total costs are estimated at 52,510 rubles. Compensation for moral damage is estimated at 500,000 rubles. They are asked to recover damages jointly from the parents of the child (M.A.K. and Zh.S.Yu.), who is guilty of causing harm to the health of the child I.T.M. and with the MBOU "Novourusovskaya Secondary School". The fault of the parents of J.R.S. is that they did not raise their son properly. And he grew up with them as a hooligan who periodically used violence against other children. In particular, in March 2012, the mother of the girl Katya Mitrofanova complained to the school director E.A.Yu. that Zh.S.Yu. used violence against her. However, the school director took no preventive measures against J.R.S. did not take action. The school administration is to blame for the improper organization of the educational process and failure to comply with educational rules and labor protection rules at the school. In particular, school teacher T.K.G. DD.MM.YYYY was illegally assigned the responsibility to teach two lessons simultaneously with different classes. Having given the task to the 5th grade students, Tasbaeva left the classroom and went to teach another class, leaving the children unsupervised. Left without teacher supervision, some children began to misbehave in class. In particular, right in the classroom during the lesson of Zh.R.S. beat I.I.V. and caused him serious harm.

Defendants M.A.K., Zh.S.Yu. and their representative did not admit the claim and referred to the following objections. Their child’s behavior is positive and is not a bully. They are raising a child. I.I.V. himself is to blame for the fight that happened in class DD.MM.YYYYG. Their child was only defending himself. Bodily injury in the form of a broken leg occurred due to negligence. J.R.S. During his time at school he was repeatedly awarded with diplomas. He was not registered as a disadvantaged child. The incident happened at school and on the basis of Art. Clause 3 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation must be borne by the educational institution. After the incident, they, as parents, apologized to the victim’s parents and voluntarily gave them 25,000 rubles to finance the costs of the child’s treatment. Presented by I.T.M. the checks are largely unfounded. Costs of food and some other goods, as well as purchases of fuel for road transport are not related to the need to treat the child.

The representative of the Municipal Budgetary Educational Institution “Novourusovskaya Secondary School” partially admitted the claim. Admits the guilt of the school administration that the educational process DD.MM.YYYYY was organized improperly. Due to the teacher's illness and absence from work, teacher T.K.G. was entrusted with the responsibility of simultaneously conducting lessons with two classes: fifth and eleventh. Having given the task to the fifth grade, Tasbaeva left the classroom and went to conduct a lesson with the 11th grade, leaving the 5th grade students alone. At this time, in the absence of the teacher, the above incident occurred. 5th grade students Zh.R.S. and I.I.V. fought among themselves. The fight was provoked by I.I.V., insulting Zh.R.S. in a rough manner. During the fight, J.R.S. put I.I.V. trip. I.I.V. I fell unsuccessfully and broke my left leg. Based on the results of an internal audit in disciplinary procedure teacher Tasbaeva was punished. Also punished was the head teacher S.T.A., responsible for occupational health and safety at the school. J.R.S. he is not a dysfunctional child; his behavior is satisfactory. Was not registered. During his time at school, he was repeatedly awarded with diplomas. Presented by I.T.M. the checks are largely unfounded. Costs for food and some other goods, as well as purchases of fuel for road transport, are not associated with the need for treatment of the child. I.I.V. Until 2015, due to health reasons, based on doctors’ certificates, he was exempt from physical education classes. Currently I.I.V. participate in physical education classes with other children, pass standards, and actively participate in school events. Based on Art. Clause 2 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, in connection with the gross negligence of the victim himself, asks the court to limit itself to finding the educational institution guilty of improper organization of the educational process DD.MM.YYYYY without making a decision on recovery from educational institution material damage and compensation for moral damage.

The prosecutor in conclusion believes the claim of I.T.M. subject to partial satisfaction. Due to lack of evidence of improper upbringing

parents J.R.S. claim against M.A.K. and J.S.Yu. believes not to be satisfied. Based on Art. and art. The Federal Law “On Education” only imposes responsibility on the MBOU “Novourusovskaya Secondary School” for compensation for harm to the health of the plaintiff’s child. The claim for material damage is requested to be partially satisfied in the amount of 7,388 rubles, since the remaining expenses are not related to the treatment of the child. The claim for compensation for moral damage in the amount of 500,000 rubles is requested to be satisfied in full. Because the child suffered serious harm to his health.

Based on the evidence presented by the parties, the court established the following circumstances in the case.

DD.MM.YYYYg at a Russian language lesson in the premises of the Novourusovskaya Secondary School, teacher T.K.G. gave the task to the 5th grade students and went to the 11th grade students, with whom she was also obliged to conduct a lesson. After the teacher left the class, J.R.S. began to misbehave in class: talking loudly, accompanying his speech with swear words. I ignored the comments of my classmates. In this connection, I.I.V. made Zh.R.S. in a rude and insulting manner. a warning to keep him quiet. In response to such a rude and offensive remark by J.R.S. started with I.I.V. fight. During the fight, J.R.S. put I.I.V. trip. I.I.V. fell. J.R.S. fell on him. As a result of the fall of I.I.V. received bodily injury in the form of a closed comminuted fracture of the diaphase of the left tibia with displacement of fragments in the middle third. This bodily injury caused serious harm to health and caused significant permanent loss of ability to work by at least one third, regardless of the outcome and treatment medical care.

The circumstances of the incident are confirmed by the resolution from DD.MM.YYYYY about the refusal to initiate a criminal case on the grounds of a crime under Art. for lack of corpus delicti, due to failure to achieve Zh.R.S. 16 years of age, from which criminal liability for this crime. And also, written explanations of witnesses classmates S.S.S., Sh.V.I. from DD.MM.YYYYg and victim I.I.V. from DD.MM.YYYYy, available in the rejected material.

The nature and severity of the bodily injury caused is confirmed by the report of the forensic expert Sh.M.Yu. from DD.MM.YYYYy.

I.I.V. was hospitalized during the period from DD.MM.YYYYy to DD.MM.YYYYy. Traction was used for treatment, which eliminated the displacement and improved the patient’s condition. On the day of discharge, the traction was removed and a bandage was applied. Immobilization is recommended for 7 weeks, then R-control. These circumstances are confirmed by an extract from the medical history of the attending physician Ivanov.

According to an extract from the outpatient card of the doctor of LLC “Traumatology Center “Lokohelp” K.I.G. from DD.MM.YYYYy no bone destructive changes were detected.

DD.MM.YYYYg, based on the results of the examination, the neurologist recommended consulting a surgeon to determine the presence of signs of deep vein thrombosis of the leg. This circumstance is confirmed by a copy of the neurologist’s doctor’s note dated DD.MM.YYYYy.

According to the conclusion of the ultrasound examination protocol dated DD.MM.YYYYg, the child has post-traumatic syndrome with indirect signs of isolated deep vein thrombosis of the left leg.

However, according to an extract from the outpatient card of the surgeon of the State Budgetary Healthcare Institution JSC “Alexandro-Mariinsk Regional Clinical Hospital” M.R.R. from DD.MM.YYYYg no vascular pathologies were detected in the child.

DD.MM.YYYYY the orthopedic doctor recommended cycling, swimming, hardening, magnetophoresis on the left shin, local application of gel, electrophoresis, exemption from physical education for 3 months. This circumstance is confirmed by the orthopedic doctor’s note dated DD.MM.YYYYy.

DD.MM.YYYYg, upon examination by an orthopedic traumatologist, the left leg was lengthened to 0.5 cm. The doctor gave approximately the same recommendations for the treatment of post-traumatic syndrome. Exemption from physical education lessons for 6 months. This circumstance is confirmed by an inspection certificate dated DD.MM.YYYYy.

Based on the circumstances established in the case, the court recognizes the claim as subject to partial satisfaction.

The court rejects the argument of the school representative, who, with reference to Art. Clause 2 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, when determining the amount of liability of the defendants, asked to take into account the gross negligence of the victim in causing him harm.

DECIDED:

I.T.M. refuse to satisfy the claim regarding recovery from the MBOU "Novourusovskaya Secondary School", M.A.K. and J.S.Yu. material damage in the amount of 52,510 rubles.

I.T.M. refuse to satisfy the claim for recovery from M.A.K. and J.S.Yu. compensation for moral damage.

To recover from MBOU "Novourusovskaya Secondary School" in favor of I.T.M. acting in the interests of the minor son of I.I.V. compensation for moral damage in the amount of 300,000 rubles.

I.T.M. refuse to satisfy the rest of the claim for the recovery of compensation for moral damage from the Novourusovskaya Secondary School.

To recover from MBOU "Novourusovskaya Secondary School" in favor of I.T.M. to reimburse the costs of paying for the representative’s services in the amount of 9,500 rubles.

To collect from the Municipal Budgetary Educational Institution “Novourusovskaya Secondary School” a state duty in the amount of 300 rubles to the budget of the Municipal Municipality “Krasnoyarsk District” of the Astrakhan Region.

The decision can be appealed to the Astrakhan regional court on appeal, through the Krasnoyarsk District Court, within a month from the date of its adoption in final form.

The final decision was made by DD.MM.YYYYy.

Judge: Kamzenov E.B.

Court:

Krasnoyarsk District Court (Astrakhan Region)

Plaintiffs:

Isalieva Tatyana Mikhailovna in the interests of Isaliev Ilya Vitalievich

Defendants:

Maydrimova A.K.
MBOU Novourusovskaya school

Judges of the case:

Kamzenov E.B. (judge)

Judicial practice on:

Moral damage and its compensation, compensation for moral damage

Judicial practice on the application of Art. 151, 1100 Civil Code of the Russian Federation

Belaya Olesya Olegovna

3rd year student, department of criminal law and criminology, branch of KubSU in Gelendzhik, Russian Federation, Gelendzhik

Olefirenko Sergey Pavlovich

scientific supervisor, Ph.D. legal sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Criminal Law and Criminology, branch of KubSU in Gelendzhik, Russian Federation, Gelendzhik

What could be worse than finding out that the child whom you lovingly raised, educated, and worried about is not actually yours, but that your own child by blood is located in an unknown place? Is he fed, warm, does someone love him? This can happen if there is a substitution in the maternity hospital. Most often, substitution occurs due to negligence, error, or even sometimes intentional substitution of children in maternity hospitals medical workers. According to statistics in Russia, on average, about 6 percent generally raise other people's children out of ignorance of their true parents. Some live this way all their lives, and some find out about the substitution due to illness, when the blood of relatives is required or during DNA tests. Information about the substitution can cause a significant blow to family life and cause serious mental distress and physical suffering (signs of moral harm) to both the child (victim) and his parents.

The substitution of a child should be understood as the replacement of one child with another. And as a result, the severance of family ties by blood, the relationship between parent and child.

The priority protection of the interests of children is recognized by the international community as one of the basic and most important principles modern law, which has received regulatory approval in Art. 3 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), which, according to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, is part of it legal system(v. 2).

The emergence of criminal legal institute substitution of a child is defined in Article 162 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR, 1922, which established a sanction in the form of imprisonment for a term of up to four years with strict isolation; also in Article 149 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR, 1926 with the sanction of imprisonment for up to three years and 125 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR, 1960 - criminal actions were punishable by imprisonment for a term of up to five years.

This crime is regulated by Russian criminal law enshrined in Article 153 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, where the content of the article establishes that the substitution of a child, committed for selfish or other inhumane reasons, implies liability in the form of imprisonment for a term of up to five years with a fine of up to two hundred thousand rubles or at the rate of wages or other income of the convicted person for a period of up to eighteen months.

The object of the crime in question is the normal (mental and spiritual) development of the child - the subject of family law. Full development is the inalienable right of every child. It is possible to replace children only at the age of up to four months (newborn) or up to one year (infant), when it is still impossible to determine the unique individual characteristics inherent in each person, or the parents have not yet had time to realize them.

From the objective side, it is the replacement of one child with another. The crime requires the disagreement of at least one of the parents of the substituted children. The place, time and method of committing the crime have no qualifying significance. Usually it is a maternity hospital or other children's institution, but it can also be a street if a child is left in a stroller on the street due to criminal negligence by a parent or a person entrusted with the child.

Child substitution is a formal crime that can be considered completed from the moment of the actual substitution.

WITH subjective side the crime provided for by this criminal norm requires only direct intent: the perpetrator realizes that he is committing a child substitution and purposefully carries out his plan. An obligatory sign of the subjective side, crimes are selfish (with the aim of obtaining some benefit) or other inhumane motives (hooliganism, generated by racial hatred, revenge, etc.). In the absence of these motives, as well as direct intent (for example, the substitution of a child, committed as a result of a careless, dishonest attitude towards one’s duties on the part of medical personnel maternity hospital) does not constitute a crime and is qualified as a misdemeanor at work. Also, if the replacement is carried out by mutual consent of the parents of both children, there is no element of replacement of the child.

If the substitution is accompanied by subsequent presentation of demands property nature as conditions for the return of the child, then the act may be qualified in conjunction with Art. 163 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - extortion.

The subject of the crime in this case is a sane individual who has reached the age of 16, in relation to whom the substitute child is a stranger. In order to commit this crime a person must have a heart of stone and complete indifference. Only a person with an unstable psyche can encroach on the family structure. Because this can destroy the future life of the child and parents.

The criminal procedure law does not contain a procedure established by the legislator for determining the amount of compensation for moral damage that would protect the rights and legitimate interests persons who have been victims of a crime (Part 1, Clause 1, Article 6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation). The amount of compensation is determined Russian court based on subjective considerations and the principles of reasonableness and justice.

How to determine the amount of compensation for moral damage, taking into account all the circumstances of the crime? We propose to determine compensation for moral damage in criminal proceedings, when considering a court case under Article 153. (Child substitution) of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation according to the following formula:

KMV= P1*360*P2*K1*K2,

where: KMV - the amount of compensation for moral damage to the injured person, rubles;

P1 - the size of the minimum wage in the current year, from 01.01. 2015 it is 5965 rubles;

360 - number of days in a year;

P2 - the number of years that have passed since the child was replaced;

K1 - correction factor applied to the defendant, taking into account his individual characteristics;

K1= 0.1, in relation to junior medical personnel ( nurse, nanny, nurse);

K1 = 0.2, in relation to the doctor;

K1 = 0.3, in relation to the head of the maternity ward;

K1 = 0.4 in relation to the chief physician of the maternity hospital, or another outsider who committed this criminal act.

K2 - correction factor applied in relation to injured person, taking into account his individual characteristics, K2 = 0.2.

For example, if a nurse replaces a child in a maternity hospital and this criminal act is discovered 20 years later, compensation for moral damage is:

KMV=5965*360*20*0.1*0.2= 858960 rubles.

We believe that the proposed formula will allow judicial procedure more accurately calculate the amount of compensation for moral damage to the victim of a crime when replacing a child.

Bibliography:

1. Crimes against family and minors//[Electronic resource] - Access mode. - URL: http://theoldtree.ru/gosudarstvo_i_pravo/prestupleniya_protiv_semi_i.php (access date 02/16/2015).
2. Convention on the Rights of the Child (Concluded on November 20, 1989) // Gazette of the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR and the USSR Armed Forces. November 7 - 1990 - No. 45. - Art. 955.
3. Constitution of the Russian Federation (adopted by popular vote on December 12, 1993, taking into account amendments, introduced by Laws of the Russian Federation on amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation dated December 30, 2008 No. 6-FKZ, dated December 30, 2008 No. 7-FKZ, dated February 5, 2014 No. 2-FKZ) // Collection of Legislation of the Russian Federation, 04.14.2014, No. 15, Art. 1691.
4. Criminal Code of the RSFSR, 1922. Resolution of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of the RSFSR dated 06/01/1922 “On the implementation of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR” // SU RSFSR, 1922, No. 15, Art. 153.
5. Criminal Code of the RSFSR, 1926. Resolution of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of the RSFSR dated November 22, 1926 “On the implementation of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR as amended in 1926” // SU RSFSR, 1926, No. 80, Art. 600.
6. Criminal Code of the RSFSR, 1960. Approved by the Supreme Council of the RSFSR on October 27, 1960 “Criminal Code of the RSFSR” // Gazette of the Supreme Council of the RSFSR, 1960, No. 40, Art. 591.
7. Criminal Code of the Russian Federation of June 13, 1996. No. 63-FZ // Collection of legislation of the Russian Federation, 06.17.1996, No. 25, art. 2954.
8. Federal Law of December 1, 2014 No. 408-FZ “On Amendments to Article 1 Federal Law“On the minimum wage” // Collection of Legislation of the Russian Federation, 08.12.2014, No. 49 (Part VI), Art. 6917.

Kambarsky District Court Udmurt Republic consisting of:
Presiding Judge Efimov S.L.,
Under Secretary H.A.R.,
having considered in open court a civil case on the claim of K.E.Z., acting in the interests of K.K.A.’s minor son, to the Autonomous Institution of the Udmurt Republic “ZOK LS” for compensation for moral damage and recovery of legal costs,

INSTALLED:

Plaintiff K.E.Z., acting in the interests of K.K.A.’s minor son, filed a claim with the Kambarsky District Court of the U.R. against the Autonomous Institution of the Udmurt Republic “ZOK LS” with demands for recovery of:

Xx xxx rubles in compensation for moral damage caused;

X xxx rubles - the amount of expenses for paying a lawyer for drawing up a statement of claim;

X xxx rubles - the amount of expenses for paying a lawyer for representing her interests in the court of first instance.

The claims are motivated by the fact that the plaintiff, along with his family, permanently resides in the city of Kambarka UR. Currently, she is dependent on her young son K.K.A., born xx.xx.xxxx.

xx June 2013 on a voucher issued by the Ministry social protection population of the Udmurt Republic, the plaintiff sent her son to the AU UR "ZOK LS", located in the Zavyalovsky district of the Udmurt Republic for a period from xx June 2013 to xx June 2013.

The child was transferred by the plaintiff to the care of the administration health camp in the city of Izhevsk, at the time of departure of the buses to the camp, from that moment on, the administration of the children's camp institution transferred all responsibility for looking after the child, the obligation to exercise appropriate supervision over the child and responsibility in the event of the child receiving corresponding harm.

xx June 2013 in the period from 21:00 to 22:00 the son of the plaintiff K.K.A. was on the territory of the defendant’s camp in the administrative building without the supervision of the institution’s administration staff and played children’s games with other children. From a careless push from one of the other children of K.K.A. fell on the interior door as a result of falling glass interior door were broken into small pieces, and the plaintiff’s son, under the pressure of his own weight, received numerous cut wounds on both hands and his left forearm.

Being in a state of shock, the child ran to the first aid station and immediately, in an official car, accompanied by camp director E.S.S. was taken to the trauma clinic of the children's city clinical hospital No. 2 of Izhevsk, where he underwent an urgent surgical operation to remove small particles of glass from the wounds and suturing the incised wounds of both hands, a plaster bandage was applied to the left hand, the child in the period from xx .06.2013 to xx.06.2013 I was treated in a hospital clinic because I lost a lot of blood after my wounds.

xx.07.2013 The plaster cast and stitches from the wounds were removed from the child at the Kambarskaya Central district hospital", today in the hands of K.K.A. significant scars from the wounds are visible, the bleeding has not partially stopped, the son complains to the plaintiff of systematic pain, cries, the child often has a fever, as a residual phenomenon after the injuries received.

Thus, as a result of improper supervision by the staff of the children's camp, her son suffered harm to health, significant bodily injury, moral suffering and moral harm.

The plaintiff learned about what had happened only the next day from the camp counselor B.M.V., who told her by phone that her son was in the hospital because he had injured both arms, which made the plaintiff very worried, she began to panic and hysterical, the details of what happened later were told to her by her son himself in the hospital.

On the day of the end of the trip, that is, 06/06/2013, a conversation took place between the plaintiff and the director of the camp E.S.S., in the presence of the plaintiff’s husband K.A.P., during which the director fully recognized the institution and staff under her control as guilty in failure to provide adequate supervision on their part over the plaintiff’s child, the director personally agreed to provide monetary compensation for damage caused to her son’s health in the amount of xx xxx rubles.

Subsequently, the defendant will voluntarily pay any monetary compensation for moral damage caused to the son of the plaintiff K.K.A. refused, explaining during the conversation that she could file a claim for compensation for moral damage caused to the court. In this connection, he believes that compensation for moral damage caused in monetary terms is subject to recovery from the defendant AU UR "ZOK LS" in her favor in the interests of her young son K.K.A. in the amount stated in the claim.

Based on everything that happened on the evening of June xx, 2013, it is obvious that the administration of the children's camp is at fault in that the children were left without appropriate control and supervision from adults, which led to the occurrence of this accident, which does not relieve the defendant from liability in terms of compensation monetary compensation for moral damage caused to her son.

The nature of the harm caused to the health of the plaintiff’s young son in the form of an appropriate degree of severity is confirmed by an extract from the medical history and medical record of her son, and by the testimony of witnesses.

The plaintiff believes that the defendant’s guilt in failing to supervise her child and the resulting consequences of incised wounds to both hands and left forearm is obvious. In this connection, from the defendant in her favor in the interests of her young son K.K.A., born xx.xx.xxxx, monetary compensation for moral damage caused is subject to recovery, the amount of which the plaintiff estimates in the amount of xx xxx rubles, the specified amount is proportionate the severity of the harm caused to the health of her young son, the nature of the physical and moral suffering suffered by her son in connection with the injuries received.

Plaintiff K.E.Z. did not appear at the court hearing, was duly notified of the time and place of the hearing of the case.

The representative of the plaintiff is lawyer G.A.Ya., acting on the basis of order No. xxx dated xx.07.2013. (ld.19), at the court hearing supported the plaintiff’s demands on the grounds set out in the claim and application for the recovery of expenses for the services of a representative. He believes that from the moment the child was transferred for rest to the specified institution, all rights and obligations were transferred to the defendant, as well as the obligation to exercise proper supervision over the child, including so that he did not receive any bodily harm. Organizations in which minors are under supervision are obliged to exercise appropriate supervision over them, as well as to be held accountable in case of inadequate provision of this supervision, if received harm to minors health, including even if the specified harm was caused by himself. The responsibility to prove that the injury was caused through no fault of the institution rests with the defendant. The child himself said that after the injuries he received, he personally, without the knowledge of the teacher and counselor, ran to the emergency room, where workers saw him and immediately, that same evening, the director put him in the car and took him to the hospital for medical care. If the counselor and teacher had performed their duties properly, they would have seen that the child was hurt. It turned out that they didn’t even see the child, and the child himself ran to the emergency room, and from there the director immediately took him to the hospital. By virtue of the provisions of Part 3 of Art. 1073 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation - if a minor citizen caused harm when he was temporarily under the supervision of an educational organization or other organization obliged to supervise him, this organization is responsible for the harm caused unless it proves that the harm arose not through their fault during the supervision. In case of harm to a minor (including to himself) during his temporary stay in an educational organization supervising him during this period, this organization is obliged to compensate for the harm caused to the minor. The subject of proof is the absence of guilt in the actions of the educational institution, but the defendant did not present this evidence. Attached to the case materials were contracts for the provision of paid services by individuals who were entrusted with the duty and responsibility for the life and health of children. Received by a minor slight harm health belongs on legal grounds to the intangible benefits of a minor. Based on the provisions of Art. 150 and art. 151 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the health of a minor is protected by law and in the event of harm to health, this is the basis for compensation for moral damage caused. Minor K.K.A. suffered moral suffering, the child was in the hospital at a time when other children were in the camp and resting. The child must receive compensation in monetary terms. Improper performance of duties resulted in the fact that teachers Sh.K.S. and B.M.V. did not supervise the children who were in the group. It was established that when the child was injured, the teacher himself was not there, she was in the dining room, and the second one was also in another room. Believes that, under these circumstances, the stated claim is justified and must be satisfied in full.

Representative of the defendant AU UR "ZOK LS" V.M.V., acting on the basis of power of attorney No. xx dated xx.07.2013. (case sheet 30), claim did not admit, she explained to the court that K.K.A. was in the AU UR "ZOK LS" in the first camp batch on a voucher received from the Ministry of Social Protection of the Population of the UR. The child was assigned to a detachment in which there was a teacher and a counselor, that is, the child was properly supervised. Children's health camp shifts were opened on 06/06/2013. in accordance with the act of accepting the readiness of the institution, that is, an unauthorized opening did not occur, the camp was prepared for the change. When the defendant’s children are on vacation, he insures his liability. It also happened in this case, xx.05.2013. an agreement was concluded with an insurance company - Insurance joint-stock company“E”, accident insurance, that is, they insured children against accidents. He believes that the child really had an accident. At 20 o'clock. 50 min. The counselor, who was supervising the children at that time, was at the building and was waiting for the children to arrive. K.K.A. went into the girls’ room, and the second boy, A., somehow pushed him, K.K.A. fell on the door and this accident happened. They immediately took all measures and provided medical assistance. The fact was recorded, there is a report, an inspector from the Zavyalovsky PDN came. They do not deny the fact of the accident; they have insured their liability. The child's legal representative should have contacted the insurance company. According to Art. 1072 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, compensation for damage by a legal entity that has insured its liability voluntarily or compulsory insurance, in favor of the victim, when the insurance compensation is not enough, then the difference between the insurance compensation and the actual amount of damage incurred is compensated. Each unit has a teacher and a counselor, who cannot constantly keep all the children in sight. The boy was not unattended. The fact that he fell and the door broke, they agree with that. The door was glazed, an ordinary wooden door, and there was glass in it. The beneficiaries of the insurance contract are children. According to the contract, only children are insured. The validity of this insurance contract was explained to the legal representative of the minor K.E.Z. They did not take a written receipt from the parents, but every parent knows that the children are insured. Insurance Company notified of this insured event, she called them herself. K.E.Z. can apply, she will be paid. This insurance contract provides compensation for damage to health; compensation for moral damage is not provided for in this contract. A counselor in the K.K.A. squad. was Sh.K.S., teacher - B.M.V.. Since camp shifts are carried out only in the summer, therefore these workers are temporary, whom they recruit for the camp period. Temporary civil law contracts are concluded with them, because they don’t even have a staffing table yet. The staffing table does not include temporary workers. The recruited people are all teachers, educators, in connection with this they have the right to work no more than 36 hours a week according to Labor Code RF. Therefore, a civil contract in this case is more profitable, according to it they are liable around the clock. Appendices to the contract are drawn up, where workers are given 24-hour responsibility. Also available job responsibilities teacher, which is an annex to the civil contract. The work schedule of the institution is regulated by the internal rules of the camp. Since the K.K.A. ticket was issued by the Ministry of Social Protection of the Urals, i.e. her territorial body- OSZN in the Kambarsky district, they entered into an agreement with the territorial bodies of the Ministry of Social Protection, and on the basis of this agreement they take the child to the camp. They do not enter into this agreement with their parents; it regulates the relationship between their organization and the territorial body of the OSZN, that they undertake to organize children's summer holidays. Believes that their institution fulfilled its responsibilities in full, there is no fault on their part. The case file contains a report from the ODN inspector, which states that the injury occurred due to negligence and the fault of the child. Moral damage is subject to recovery only if the cause of harm is at fault. In accordance with paragraph 3 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 10 dated December 12, 1994, in accordance with current legislation, one of mandatory conditions the onset of liability for causing moral damage is the fault of the causer. The exception is cases expressly provided for by law, i.e. This is harm caused to life and health by a source of increased danger. He believes that the institution is not to blame for what happened, the child is hyperactive, very mobile, an accident occurred, and asks for this reason to refuse to satisfy the demands.

At the request of the representative of the plaintiff to participate in the case as third parties who do not declare independent requirements regarding the subject of the dispute on the defendant’s side, B.M.V. was involved. and Sh.K.S., who did not appear at the court hearing, were duly notified of the time and place of the consideration of the case, asked to consider the case without their participation. Earlier in the preliminary court hearing, these persons were questioned as witnesses.

At the preliminary court hearing, witness B.M.V. explained that she entered into an agreement for the provision of services for a fee with the legal entity AU UR “ZOK LS” dated 06/06/2012. The agreement came into force on June xx, 2012. and was valid until June xx, 2012, this is a short-term contract for the first batch. She held the position of teacher. In accordance with this agreement, she was obliged to ensure the safe functioning of children during the first batch. Her main responsibility was to monitor the life and health of the children, educate them, and ensure a comfortable stay for the children. In her functional responsibilities was to exercise control and supervision over the children entrusted to her. Annex to the contract - Certificate of provision of services dated June xx. 2012, she signed. There were no claims against her from the AU UR “ZOK LS”. Everything happened xx.06.2012. in the period from 20 o'clock. 50 min. until 21.00 o'clock. For the second half of the evening after dinner, they had a school-wide event scheduled, after which they were all present at the site, where all the squads participated, including their squad No. xx. Events take place from 19:00 until the “late night”, which starts at 20:00. 30 min. During this period of time, all units were at the event. After the end of the event, the entire camp goes to an additional fifth meal - “late”. She, as a teacher, invited all the children to a “late party”, where the children all received food and after that, with an assistant teacher, they went down to the detachment, where they were supposed to gather as a whole detachment to sum up the results of the day, the so-called daily “light” which happens from 21:00 to 21:00. 30 min. Since their children are small, they do not yet assign people on duty, as in the older units, and therefore, by agreement with the assistant teacher, she was on duty that day and wiped the table in the dining room where the children ate. Arriving at the detachment, she already heard from the words of the counselor, assistant teacher and children that an accident had occurred. When the accident occurred, she was not in the detachment; she was in the dining room, wiping the table. The canteen workers did not wipe the tables themselves, because they had a large amount of work to do; they did it in turns. According to assistant teacher Sh.K.S. she found out what happened to K.K.A., who said that she gathered the children for the “light”, the children took off their shoes and put them in cells. K.K.A. Having done this first, he ran into the girls' territory. Since he is a very active and mobile child, he took the initiative and ended up in the girls’ territory. And when he heard that everyone was going to the fire, he ran, tripped and was injured. Sh.K.S. at that moment she was in the same hall, on the first floor of their building, helping all the other children. Their detachment was located on the 1st floor of the 6th building of the AU UR "ZOK LS".

The witness testified that the photograph (case file 94) shows the doors to the girls’ ward. K.K.A. tripped and grabbed the left door with his hands. After everything happened, the glass in the door was replaced. Wooden bars were already installed on the door when they arrived at the detachment. The bars were definitely there from the beginning of the shift.

When asked by the court, the witness could not answer whether wiping tables was her immediate responsibility.

At the preliminary court hearing, witness Sh.K.S. explained that she entered into an agreement with the Autonomous Institution UR "ZOK LS". She signed the agreement, all the annexes, acts to this agreement. According to the contract, from June 1 to June xx, 2013, she worked as an assistant teacher. That day they walked with the detachment after a late dinner (late dinner) from the dining room to the building. K.K.A. disobeyed her, did not march in formation, but went ahead into the corps. When he and the squad arrived at the building, he ran to the girls’ room, followed by another boy A.. Together they ran into the hall, when she called them, A. ran ahead, he ran out of the corridor and slammed the door constitutes a door, causing K.K.A. crashed into the door. The witness testified that case sheet 94 shows exactly the door on which K.K.A. cut himself, it’s on the first floor. She did not remember which half of the door the child hit. The glass in the door was located approximately 1 meter from the floor. At the time of the accident, the wooden bars were nailed onto the door, but not all the wooden bars were there, and they weren't nailed that often. There were 3 of them instead of 5 shown in the photograph, the distance between the slats was greater. She doesn't understand how K.K.A. could have cut himself if there was a bar on the door; at that moment she was distracted to call the other guys into the hall to sum up the results of the day. When she and the children walked down the hall, the teacher was in the dining room, as they were eating, and her task was to clear the tables, so the teacher was not with them at that moment. The teacher must help the canteen staff, he must appoint people on duty to clean the tables, but since they had a junior detachment, they did not assign people on duty, i.e. The teacher was responsible for this. She, as an assistant teacher, instructed her to lead the detachment to the building. That is, one person took the squad away, and another person cleared the tables, sometimes they changed. In this situation, it was her turn to withdraw the squad. After the boy was cut, a technician immediately took him to the first aid station, then she came to the first aid station. K.K.A. There they bandaged me and gave me an anesthetic injection. Then he was taken away somewhere, and then medical workers and the camp director talked to her. The director of the camp at that time was there and calmed her down. Ambulance immediately called the workers of the first aid station, K.K.A. They quickly took me to the hospital within half an hour. How long has K.K.A. was in the hospital, she doesn’t know, but he was gone until the end of his shift.

Taking into account the opinions of the participants in the process who appeared, the case was considered at the specified appearance on the basis of Art. 167 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation.

The court, having listened to the explanations of the representative of the plaintiff and the representative of the defendant, examined the materials of the civil case, assessed and analyzed the evidence in its entirety, comes to the following.

In accordance with the passport series xx xx No. xxxxxxx, the plaintiff is K.E.Z., xx.xx.xxxx year of birth, native (personal data excluded) (case file 6).

According to the repeated birth certificate, series I-NI No. xxxxxxx, issued by the Civil Registry Office of the administration of the Kambarsky District of the Udmurt Republic, the mother of K.K.A., born xx.xx.xxxxx, is plaintiff K.E.Z. (case file 7).

Minor K.K.A. from xx June 2013 to xx June 2013, he was sent on a voucher issued by OSZN in the Kambarsky district to the AU UR “ZOK LS”, located at the address: (address) (return coupon to voucher No. xx series RC, ld. 10).

According to the injury report dated June xx. 2013, drawn up by a commission consisting of the director of the AU UR “ZOK LS” E/S.S., doctor Ch.A.A., deputy director for HR N.K.V., deputy director for the safety of O.N.A., the circumstances of the injury to K.K.A., born xx.xx.xxxx, which occurred on June 06, 2013, were considered, and the following circumstances of the injury were identified: 06/06/2013 at 20.50 o’clock. teacher of the 12th detachment B.M.V. was in the dining room, clearing away the dishes after a late party, counselor Sh.K.S. at this time I was talking with the boys at the entrance to the building in order to take them out into the hall. At this point K.K.A. I came in from the girls' rooms. According to R., Sh.K.S. I found out that one of the boys, A., decided to call him. When A. went back to the hall, he tripped on the threshold and the door to the girls’ corridor swung open. Walking behind A.K.K.A. stumbled upon an open door and broke the glass, as a result of which he was injured. As a result of the injuries received, K.K.A. was taken to the ZOK LS first aid post, where he was given first aid. xx.06.2013, accompanied by medical workers, the child was sent by ambulance to the trauma clinic in the city of Izhevsk, where he was provided with medical care (case file 90).

From the report of the ODN inspector of the Zavyalovsky department T.A.E. dated xx.06.2013 it follows that on xx.06.2013 the duty unit of the “Zavyalovsky” department received a message from the inspector of the ODN of the “Zavyalovsky” department, police lieutenant T.A.E., registered in KUSP under No. xxxxx dated xx.06.2013 about that during a reconciliation with the injury log of the AU UR "ZOK LS" it was established that on June 06, 2013, minor K.K.A., born xxxxx, while on vacation at the AU UR "ZOK LS" received a cut injury wound on the left forearm, small incised wounds on both hands.” The inspection established that minor K.K.A., born xx.xx.xxxx, lives at the address: (address 2), is being brought up in a complete family. According to the purchased voucher K.K.A. Since 06/06/2013 he has been in the children's health camp of the AU UR "ZOK LS". While staying in the camp on 06/06/2013 at about 9:00 p.m., minor K.K.A. Gathering the guys for the evening squad meeting, he ran from the girls’ room along the corridor of the 1st floor of the 3rd building. At the door leading to the hall, juvenile K.K.A. tripped over his slippers and fell on the door, breaking the glass in the door with both hands. As a result of the broken glass, the minor received numerous cut wounds to both hands, which caused him pain. To provide medical assistance, he was taken to Children's City Hospital No. 2 in Izhevsk, where he underwent surgery to stitch up the wounds and was diagnosed with “an incised wound of the left forearm, small incised wounds of both hands.” Currently, the minor is in the hospital, his health condition is satisfactory, he was injured due to his own negligence. No one intentionally caused harm to his health (case file 92).

According to medical card No. xxx/xxx inpatient, K.K.A., x years old, admitted 06/06/2013 at 10 p.m. 40 min. to the orthopedic and traumatology department of the BUZ UR "RDKB MZ UR". The patient was referred to the AU UR "ZOK LS" 40 minutes after receiving the injury. Date of discharge xx.06.2013, spent 12 bed days in the department. The final clinical diagnosis: incised wounds of both hands and left forearm (case file 64).

According to an extract from the medical history No. xxx/xxx, patient K.K.A., x years old, was treated at the Children's Children's Hospital of the UR "Russian Children's Clinical Hospital of the Ministry of Health of the Urals" from xx.06.2013 to xx.06.2013, the main diagnosis: incised wounds of both hands and left forearms. It is recommended to be observed at the place of residence by a pediatric surgeon upon discharge and have the sutures removed on June 28-30 (case file 9).

According to expert opinion No. xxx dated xx.08.2013 from K.K.A. bodily injuries were found in the following quantities: healed incised wounds on the left forearm-1, on the left hand-1, in the area of ​​the right wrist joint-1, multiple abrasions on the hands and forearms. The damage was caused by the impact of cutting objects, possibly glass fragments. Considering the nature and location of the injuries on K.K.A.’s body, these injuries could have been caused under the circumstances described by the plaintiff in the statement of claim. Taking into account the morphological features of the injuries, the condition of the victim upon admission to the hospital, and the age of the injuries can be classified as received on June xx, 2013. The injuries are classified as minor harm to health on the basis of a short-term health disorder (case sheet 102-103).

These circumstances were established at the court hearing by the evidence presented and are not disputed by the parties.

From the explanations contained in paragraph 14 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated January xx, 2010 No. 1 “On the application by courts of civil legislation regulating relations under obligations resulting from harm to the life or health of a citizen” it follows that in the event of harm to minors (including including himself) during his temporary stay in an educational organization (for example, in kindergarten, secondary school, gymnasium, lyceum), medical organization(for example, in a hospital, sanatorium) or other organization that supervised him during this period, or with a person who supervised him on the basis of an agreement, these organizations or a person are obliged to compensate for the harm caused to the minor, unless they prove that it did not arise through their fault during supervision.

According to paragraph 3 of Article 1073 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, if a minor caused harm, including to himself, while he was under the supervision of an educational, educational, medical or other institution obliged to supervise him, or the person who supervised him supervision on the basis of a contract, this institution or person is liable for harm unless it proves that the harm arose not through its fault during the implementation of supervision.

Thus, the specified legal norm a presumption of guilt is established for an educational or other institution obligated to supervise a minor who has caused harm while under the supervision of this institution.

In accordance with the Charter of the Autonomous Institution UR "ZOK LS", the institution was created to perform work and provide services in the field of social protection of the population (clause 15). The subject of the institution’s activities is the organization and implementation of recreation and health improvement for the population (clause 16). The purpose of the institution is to provide services in the field of social protection of the population, including recreation and health services for children in difficult situations. life situation(clause 17) (case sheets 31-41).

To achieve this goal, the institution carries out basic activities, including organizing and providing recreation for the population (including children in difficult life situations); organization and holding of leisure, entertainment, sports, physical education, health, cultural and public events; organization and implementation of health improvement for the population (including children in difficult life situations) (clause 19 of the Charter).

Between OJSC "Insurance Joint Stock Company "E" and AU UR "ZOK LS" on May xx, 2013, agreement No. xxxxxxx-xxx-xxxxxxx/xx of accident insurance was concluded (case sheet 55-57). The subject of the agreement is voluntary insurance of children (insured persons) against accidents (clause 1.2). Insurance coverage of the insured persons is valid during their stay at the AU UR "ZOK LS", (address), including the time spent on the road from Izhevsk - AU UR "ZOK LS" - Izhevsk (clause 1.6).

Insurance risks under this agreement include, but are not limited to, the consequences of injuries and illnesses resulting from an accident specified in clause 2.3 of this agreement, which occurred during the validity period of this agreement and in the territory specified in clause 1.6 of the agreement (clause 2.2. 1). Under this agreement, an accident is understood to mean something that actually occurred during the term of this agreement, a sudden, unforeseen event, as a result of which the health of the insured occurred, including mechanical injuries (bruises, sprains, dislocations, fractures, ruptures (wounds) of organs and tissues , tissue compression and internal organs, shocks) (clause 2.3, clause 2.3.1).

This agreement is valid from June xx 2013. to xx June 2013 (clause 4.1).

The defendant AU UR "ZOK LS" concluded with its employees civil contracts. With teacher B.M.V. and assistant teacher Sh.K.S. agreements for the provision of paid services were concluded with an individual dated June xx, 2013 No. ххк and No. ххк respectively (case sheets 76-78, 82-84). Under these contracts for the provision of paid services, the Contractor undertakes, on the instructions of the Customer, to provide services in accordance with Appendix 1 to the agreement, and the Customer undertakes to pay for these services (clause 1.1).

In accordance with Appendix No. 1 to the contract dated June xx. 2013 No. xxk, the teacher is obliged to: plan and organize the life activities and recreation of children, monitor them and their upbringing; together with medical workers, ensure the preservation and strengthening of the health of vacationing children, carry out activities that promote their psychophysical development, and be responsible for their life and health. The teacher is responsible for the life and health of children (case file 84).

In accordance with Appendix No. 1 to Agreement No. xx.06.2013 No. xxk, the assistant teacher is obliged to: plan and organize the life activities of children and carry out their upbringing. The assistant teacher is responsible for the life and health of children (case file 78).

Similar duties and responsibilities of the teacher and assistant teacher are reflected in the Instructions (internal regulations) for the teaching staff of the AU UR “ZOK LS” (case sheet 110).

An analysis of the presented contracts for the provision of paid services and the Instructions for teaching staff allows the court to come to the conclusion that cleaning tables in the dining room is not the responsibility of the teacher and assistant teacher. The teacher should have been with the children and monitored them, especially considering the hyperactivity of the children, as the representative of the defendant V.M.V. spoke about in his explanations. and witness B.M.V., and also taking into account the number of children in the detachment.

In addition, analyzing the evidence presented, the explanations of the defendant’s representative and witnesses, the court believes that AU UR “ZOK LS” did not comply with building codes and regulations.

So, in accordance with paragraph 5.31 of the Construction Norms and Rules SNiP 31-06-2009 “Public Buildings and Structures” (approved by order of the Ministry of Regional Development of the Russian Federation dated September xx, 2009 No. 390), on glazed doors in preschool buildings educational institutions, schools, holiday homes and sanatoriums for parents with children must be provided with protective grilles with a height of at least 1.2 m from the floor.

This requirement is also enshrined in the Code of Rules SP 1.13130.2009 “Systems fire protection. Evacuation routes and exits" (approved by order of the Ministry of Emergency Situations of the Russian Federation dated March xx, 2009 No. 171), where in paragraph 5 "Objects intended for permanent residence and temporary stay of people", pp. 5.2 “Children’s preschool institutions, specialized homes for the elderly and disabled (non-residential), hospitals, special buildings of boarding schools and children's institutions", it is reflected that on the glazed doors in children's preschool institutions Protective grilles must be provided to a height of at least 1.2 m. (clause 5.2.27).

Witness Sh.K.S. testified that the glass in the door that K.K.A. hit was located at a distance of approximately 1 meter from the floor, and not all the strips reflected in the photograph were installed on the door (case file 94), there were 3 of them instead 5, the distance between the slats was greater (ld. 142).

Also, the representative of the defendant V.M.V. in her explanations she said that only after what happened with K.K.A. additional slats were placed on the door as an additional measure of protection (case file 141).

Thus, as can be seen from the evidence available in the case materials, including the testimony of witnesses, the above-mentioned requirements of the regulatory acts of the AU UR “ZOK LS” were not fully met. The protective grille on the glazed doors, on which a young child was injured, did not ensure the safety of his health. Subsequently, the defendant took additional measures protection to minimize the distance between the grating slats.

The presented materials of the case confirm that the harm to the health of the plaintiff’s young son was caused on June xx, 2013 while he was in the AU UR “ZOK LS”, therefore, due to the above-mentioned requirements of the law, the defendant must be held responsible for the bodily injuries and moral suffering received by the minor.

In addition, the court considers it necessary to note that a minor victim cannot be considered guilty due to his lack of the necessary degree of psychophysical maturity, and, therefore, cannot contribute to the occurrence or increase of harm intentionally or through gross negligence.

Article 12 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation as one of the methods of protection civil rights provides for the possibility of the injured party to demand compensation for moral damage.

Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in paragraph 2 of the Resolution of December xx, 1994. No. 10 “Some issues of application of legislation on compensation for moral harm” explained that moral harm is understood as moral or physical suffering caused by actions (inaction) that encroach on intangible benefits belonging to a citizen from birth or by force of law (life, health, personal dignity, business reputation, integrity privacy, personal and family secrets, etc.) or violating his personal non-property rights (the right to use his name, the right of authorship and other non-property rights in accordance with laws on the protection of rights to the results of intellectual activity) or violating the property rights of a citizen.

Moral harm, in particular, may consist of moral feelings in connection with the loss of relatives, the inability to continue active social life, loss of work, disclosure of family or medical secrets, dissemination of untrue information discrediting the honor, dignity or business reputation of a citizen, temporary restriction or deprivation of any rights, physical pain associated with injury, other damage to health or due to illness suffered as a result of moral suffering, etc.

In accordance with Art. Art. 150, 151 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, health and personal integrity are protected in accordance with the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and other laws in the cases and in the manner prescribed by them. If a citizen has suffered moral harm (physical or moral suffering) by actions that violate his personal non-property rights or encroach on other intangible benefits belonging to the citizen, the court may impose on the violator the obligation of monetary compensation for the specified harm. When determining the amount of compensation for moral damage, the court takes into account the degree of guilt of the offender and other circumstances worthy of attention. The court must take into account the degree of physical and moral suffering associated with the individual characteristics of the person who suffered harm.

In accordance with Art. 1101 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, compensation for moral damage is carried out in cash. The amount of compensation for moral damage is determined by the court depending on the nature of the physical and moral suffering caused to the victim, as well as the degree of guilt of the harm-doer in cases where guilt is the basis for compensation for harm. When determining the amount of compensation for damage, the requirements of reasonableness and fairness must be taken into account. The nature of physical and moral suffering is assessed by the court, taking into account the factual circumstances in which moral harm was caused and the individual characteristics of the victim.

It is well known and does not need to be proven that any injury, violating the integrity of the body, causes pain to a person and causes various kinds inconveniences, including during normal life functions, interfere with the harmonious flow of life.

According to the court, as a result of the injury received, minor K.K.A. moral harm (physical or moral suffering) has been caused.

However, the amount of compensation for moral damage claimed by the plaintiff is too high and is subject to reduction.

When determining the amount of compensation for moral damage, the court takes into account:

• the degree of harm caused to health, classified as minor harm to health on the basis of a short-term health disorder;
• the period of the child's stay in the hospital;
• age of minor K.K.A.;
• the circumstances under which the injury occurred;
• prompt provision of primary medical care to the child by employees of the Autonomous Institution UR "ZOK LS" and immediate calling of an ambulance after identifying the fact that a minor received K.K.A. injuries;
• requirements of reasonableness and fairness.

Taking into account the above, the court considers that compensation for moral damage in the amount of xx xxx rubles should be recovered in favor of the plaintiff. The court considers this amount to be justified and adequate for the minors K.K.A. moral and physical suffering.

Regarding the collection of legal costs, the court comes to the following conclusion.

In accordance with Art. 88 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation court expenses consist of state fees and costs associated with the consideration of the case.

According to Art. 94 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the costs associated with the consideration of the case include the costs of paying for the services of representatives.

In accordance with Art. 98 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the court awards the party in whose favor the court decision is made to reimburse the other party for all legal expenses incurred in the case.

According to Art. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, to the party in whose favor the court decision was made, at its written request, the court awards, on the other hand, the costs of paying for the services of a representative within reasonable limits.

The court decision was made in favor of the plaintiff, who paid the lawyer xxxx rubles for drawing up the statement of claim, which is confirmed by the receipt for cash receipt order No. A-175 dated 07/07/2013. (ld. 3), and xxxx rubles for representing the interests of the plaintiff in court, which is confirmed by the receipt for cash receipt order No. A-191 dated 07/07/2013. (case file 21).

According to the legal position Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, set out in the Determination of July xx, 2007 No. 382-О-О, the court is obliged to recover the costs of paying for the services of a representative incurred by the person in whose favor the decision was made judicial act, from another person participating in the case, within reasonable limits is one of those provided for by law legal methods, aimed against the unreasonable overestimation of the amount of payment for the services of a representative and thereby to implement the requirement of Article 17 (Part 3) of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, according to which the exercise of human and civil rights and freedoms should not violate the rights and freedoms of other persons.

Considering the category of the case, the volume of services provided by the plaintiff’s representative legal services, the time spent on preparing documents, the quantity and quality of documents presented to the court, the specific circumstances of the case and the nature of the disputed legal relations, the actual time spent on the participation of a representative in the case, and based on the requirements of reasonableness, the court considers it necessary to determine the amount to be recovered from the defendant in favor of the plaintiff for filing a claim in the amount of xxxx rubles and for representation in court in the amount of xxxx rubles.

Clause 3 of part 1 of article 333.36 Tax Code The Russian Federation stipulates that from paying state fees in cases considered in courts general jurisdiction, as well as justices of the peace, release plaintiffs in claims for compensation for damage caused by injury or other damage to health, as well as the death of the breadwinner.

Since the decision was in favor of the plaintiff, who was exempt from paying state duty, then by virtue of Art. 98, part 1 art. 103 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, paragraphs. 3 p. 1 art. 333.19, sec. 8 clause 1 art. 333.20 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the defendant is subject to recovery for local budget income National tax in the amount of xxx rubles.

The provisions of Article 56 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation were explained to the persons participating in the case in terms of the parties proving the circumstances to which they refer; the persons participating in the case refused to provide additional evidence.

Guided by Art. Art. 194-199 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, court

Decided:

The claims of K.E.Z., acting in the interests of K.K.A.’s minor son, against the Autonomous Institution of the Udmurt Republic “ZOK LS” are partially satisfied.

Collect from Autonomous institution of the Udmurt Republic “ZOK LS” in favor of K.E.Z. compensation for moral damage in the amount of xx xxx rubles, legal expenses for paying a lawyer for filing a claim in the amount of x xxx rubles and paying for the services of a representative in the amount of x xxx rubles.

The rest of the claims of K.E.Z., acting in the interests of K.K.A.’s minor son, against the Autonomous Institution of the Udmurt Republic “ZOK LS” shall be refused.

To collect from the Autonomous Institution of the Udmurt Republic “ZOK LS” a state duty in the amount of xxx rubles for the budget revenue of the municipal municipality “Kambarsky district”.

The decision can be appealed on appeal to the Supreme Court of the Udmurt Republic through the Kambarsky District Court of the Udmurt Republic within a month from the date the decision was made in final form.

The full text of the decision was made on October xx, 2013.

The original of this decision is filed in civil case No. 2-1004/2014, stored in the Naberezhnye Chelny City Court of the Republic of Tatarstan

Case No. 2-1004/2014

SOLUTION

In the name of the Russian Federation

Naberezhnye Chelny City Court of the Republic of Tatarstan, composed of presiding judge R.G. Zakirova,

Under secretary E.O. Emelyanova,

With the participation of the plaintiff S.Yu. Moreva, the representative of the defendant Secondary School No.... D.D. Nuriakhmetov, the defendant S.Kh. Musharapov,

Having considered in open court a civil case on the claim of Moreva... against secondary school No...., Ivanova..., ... ..., Musharapova..., ... ... for compensation for material damage and compensation for moral damage,

U S T A N O V I L:

S.Yu. Moreva filed a lawsuit for compensation for material damage and compensation for moral damage, indicating that... her minor son Morev... was born at about... hours in MBOU Secondary School No.... Naberezhnye Chelny was beaten by classmates during a biology lesson in the absence of the teacher.... During the beating, his son's jacket was torn. These actions caused material damage in the amount of 1,500.00 rubles, and moral damage, since the beatings were inflicted on the son, which caused moral and physical suffering. Requests to recover RUB 1,500.00 from the defendants. the cost of the jacket, and moral damages of 15,000.00 rubles each. from each guilty party involved in the beating.

Plaintiff S.Yu. Moreva clarified her demands at the court hearing and asked that the civil case against the Ivanovs be terminated due to their voluntary compliance with the demands, since they paid her 750.00 rubles. for a torn suit and 750.00 rub. for compensation for moral damage, has no claims against them, from Musharapova V.E. and him legal representative S.Kh. Musharapova asks to recover the remaining unreimbursed 750.00 rubles and 15,000.00 rubles as compensation for material damage for the torn jacket. for compensation for moral damage. He has no complaints against the school, considers it an improper defendant, and asks that nothing be collected from the school.

With the consent of the plaintiff, the court brought in MBOU Secondary School No...., minors... as co-defendants.

The representative of the defendant Secondary School No.... D.D. Nuriakhmetov did not recognize the claim at the court hearing, he asked to dismiss the claim against the school, since the minors... at the time of the crime had reached the age of 15 years and must independently bear responsibility for the harm caused .

The defendant... did not admit the claim, in the presence of the teacher... explained that the fight with... occurred at school during a biology lesson due to the fault of..., therefore he should not bear civil liability.

The defendants E.G. Ivanova, ..., S.Kh. Musharapova - legal representative ... did not appear at the court hearing, and were duly notified of the time and place of the consideration of the case.

The representative of the third party of the Department of Guardianship and Trusteeship under the Executive Committee of Naberezhnye Chelny did not appear at the court hearing; he was duly notified of the time and place of the consideration of the case

Taking into account the opinions of the participants in the process, the court considers it possible to consider the case in the absence of persons who did not appear.

After listening to the parties and studying the case materials, the court comes to the following conclusion.

After listening to the persons participating in the case, examining written evidence and other materials of the case, the court finds the claim justified and subject to satisfaction on the following grounds.

In accordance with the article of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a person whose right has been violated may demand full compensation for the losses caused to him, unless the law or contract provides for compensation for losses in a smaller amount.

Losses are understood as expenses that a person whose right has been violated has made or will have to make to restore the violated right, loss or damage to his property (real damage), as well as lost income that this person would have received under normal conditions civil turnover, if his right had not been violated (lost profits).

According to paragraph 1 of Article of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, harm caused to the person or property of a citizen, as well as harm caused to property legal entity, is subject to compensation in full by the person who caused the harm.

An article of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation provides that minors aged fourteen to eighteen years are independently responsible for harm caused to them. general principles. In the event that a minor aged fourteen to eighteen years does not have income or other property sufficient to compensate for damage, the damage must be compensated in full or in the missing part by his parents (adoptive parents) or guardian, unless they prove that the damage did not arise it's their fault.

In accordance with the article of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, if a citizen is caused moral harm (physical or moral suffering) by actions that violate his personal non-property rights or encroach on other intangible benefits belonging to the citizen, as well as in other cases provided for by law, the court may impose a penalty on the violator obligation to provide monetary compensation for said damage. When determining the amount of compensation for moral damage, the court takes into account the degree of guilt of the offender and other circumstances worthy of attention. The court must also take into account the degree of physical and mental suffering associated with the individual characteristics of the person who suffered harm.

The article of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation establishes that compensation for moral damage is carried out in monetary form. The amount of compensation for moral damage is determined by the court depending on the nature of the physical and moral suffering caused to the victim, as well as the degree of guilt of the harm-doer in cases where guilt is the basis for compensation for harm. When determining the amount of compensation for damage, the requirements of reasonableness and fairness must be taken into account. The nature of physical and moral suffering is assessed by the court, taking into account the actual circumstances in which moral harm was caused and the individual characteristics of the victim.

According to the explanations given in paragraph 15 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 1 of January 26, 2010 “On the application by courts of civil legislation regulating relations under obligations resulting from harm to life and health” when resolving disputes related to compensation for harm caused to minors aged from fourteen to eighteen years of age, the courts should proceed from the fact that, in accordance with paragraph 1 of Article of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, damage is subject to compensation in full on a general basis by the minors themselves (Article of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

If a minor who is entrusted with the obligation to compensate for harm does not have earnings or property sufficient to compensate for the harm, the obligation to compensate for the harm is fully or partially assigned subsidiarily to his parents (adoptive parents) or trustees, unless they prove the absence of their guilt. Their obligation to compensate for harm, according to paragraph 3 of Article of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, terminates when the minor offender reaches eighteen years of age or when he has previously acquired full legal capacity. If the minor has sufficient funds to compensate for the harm before he reaches eighteen years of age, the performance of the obligation by the subsidiary defendants is suspended and can be resumed if the corresponding income ceases.

As can be seen from the decision to refuse to initiate a criminal case dated... year,... about 12.00 o'clock at... in the biology classroom at the moment when the teacher left the class, minors...... year of birth, and. .. year of birth, on the basis of personal hostility, they beat up a minor..., as a result of their actions, a jacket belonging to... worth 1,500.00 rubles (case file 9) was torn. The decision was not appealed by interested parties.

At the direction of the inspector of the ODN OP No.... ... a forensic medical examination was carried out..., according to which...... bodily injuries were found in the form of bruises, intradermal hemorrhages of the facial area, which did not cause harm to health, since did not entail a short-term health disorder, were obtained as a result of the traumatic impact of blunt hard objects (the mechanism of their formation involved impact and compression) (case sheet 44-45).

In connection with these events... in relation to the parents... - E.G. Ivanova and... - Kh.S. Musharapova, protocols were drawn up on administrative offense behind improper execution parental responsibilities under Part 1 of the Article of the Russian Federation (case sheets 32-33).

As can be seen from the birth certificate... born..., is a minor (l.d10).

According to the certificate, a school suit... was purchased..., the cost of the jacket was separately estimated at RUB 1,500.00. (case file 47). The parties do not dispute the cost of material damage in the specified amount.

As can be seen from the explanations... received during the investigation, he did not deny the fact of striking..., both on his part and from the side..., but his striking was due to the fact that... he spoke obscenely , also the jacket could have been torn when taken apart (case file 39). Similar explanations were given... (case file 38).

Assessing the available evidence, the court comes to the conclusion that the harm... was caused as a result of the actions of minors.... At the time of the commission of these actions... was 15 years old,... 14 years old (case sheet 37, 37ob).

The defendants did not prove that they were not guilty of the conflict. The court does not see any grounds for releasing the defendants from liability. The legal representatives of E.G. Ivanova and S.Kh. Musharapova did not provide evidence that the harm arose through no fault of theirs.

When resolving a controversial legal relationship, the rules governing compensation for harm to health are subject to application, namely the article of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, which provides for liability for harm caused by minors aged fourteen to eighteen years. Since the direct causers of harm are..., then in accordance with the rules of law contained in the specified article of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the burden of responsibility for the harm caused is placed on them.

According to the plaintiff, the civil case against... and E.G. Ivanova was terminated due to the plaintiff’s refusal of the claim due to the voluntary satisfaction of the stated demands.

Thus, taking into account the above, the court considers that the requirements for recovery of material damage for a torn jacket in the amount of 750.00 rubles. subject to satisfaction. The court also believes that claims for compensation for moral damage are subject to claims, since the plaintiff’s son was struck in the presence of the entire class, was beaten, and thereby suffered.

Taking into account the degree of guilt of the defendant, the circumstances of the incident, the principles of proportionality and reasonableness, the court determines the amount of compensation for moral damage to be recovered from the minor defendant... in the amount of 750.00 rubles.

At the same time, as established at the court hearing... is a student high school, currently has no income of her own.

Based on paragraph 2 of Article of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the above explanations given in paragraph 15 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 1 of January 26, 2010 “On the application by courts of civil legislation regulating relations under obligations resulting from harm to life and health,” the court imposes an obligation for damages subsidiarily to the defendant S.Kh. Musharapov - the legal representative of the minor V.E. Musharapov in the event that the latter has no income or property, until the minor defendant reaches the age of majority or before acquiring legal capacity.

Taking into account the circumstances of the case, MBOU Secondary School No.... should be released from civil liability in this regard.

In accordance with the article of the Civil procedural code The Russian Federation party in whose favor the court decision was made is awarded the costs incurred in the case in proportion to the satisfied claims.

Taking into account the above and guided by articles -, of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the court

DECIDED:

Morevaya's claims... partially satisfied.

To recover from the minor Musharapov... in favor of Moreva... for compensation for material damage 750.00 rubles, compensation for moral damage 750.00 rubles, for the return of state fees 600.00 rubles, a total of 2,100.00 rubles.

If Musharapov... has no income or property before he reaches the age of majority or acquires legal capacity, the indicated amounts shall be recovered subsidiarily from Musharapova....

The rest of the claim is denied.

MBOU Secondary School No.... exempt from civil liability.

The decision can be appealed to the Supreme Court of the Republic of Tatarstan by filing an appeal within one month through the Naberezhnye Chelny City Court.

Judge: signature

Copy is right

Judge R.G. Zakirova

The decision came into force...

Judge R.G. Zakirova

Compensation for losses

Judicial practice on the application of Art. 15 Civil Code of the Russian Federation