Victory in the appeal court of the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug – Ugra
Yulia Kalinina defended the interests of the Transport Agency CJSC (Khanty-Mansiysk) in a dispute with the Office of Rospotrebnadzor in the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug – Ugra, while the earlier decision of the court of first instance recognizing the actions of the Transport Agency CJSC as illegal in relation to the indefinite range of consumers, as well as the obligation to bring the court’s decision to consumers through its website on the Internet is recognized as invalid.
On December 15, 2017 the Judicial Collegium for Civil Affairs of the court of the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug – Ugra made an appeal decision on the satisfaction of the complaint of Transport Agency CJSC. The court agreed with the arguments of the representative of the JSC “Transport Agency”, Yulia Kalinina, about the insolvency of the opponent’s position, as well as the latter’s misinterpretation of the substantive law.
According to the explanations of p. 20 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated June 28, 2012 No. 17 “On consideration by the courts of civil cases on disputes on the protection of consumer rights” in accordance with Art. Art. 45, 46 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Art. Art. 44, 45 and 46 of the Law of the Russian Federation of February 7, 1992 No. 2300-I “On Protection of Consumer Rights” (hereinafter – the Law), the court of general jurisdiction has jurisdiction over cases filed by prosecutors, authorized bodies, local governments, public associations of consumers (their associations , unions), having the status of a legal entity, to the manufacturer (seller, performer, authorized organization or authorized individual entrepreneur, importer), filed in defense of the rights and legitimate interests of an indefinite number of consumers. In the protection of the rights and legitimate interests of an indefinite number of consumers, these persons can only make claims whose purpose is to recognize the actions of the defendant as unlawful or to stop the illegal actions of the defendant (Article 1065 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, Article 46 of the Law on Consumer Protection).
However, the court of first instance did not take into account that on the day of the claim, as well as on the day of the decision, Federal Law No. 242-FZ of July 18, 2011 “On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation on the Implementation of State Control (supervision) and municipal control ”Part 1 of Art. 46 of the Law is stated in a different wording. According to Part 1 of Art. 46 of the Law (as of July 1, 2014), the state supervisory authority, local governments, public consumer associations are entitled to sue the courts only for the termination of unlawful actions by the manufacturer (performer, seller, authorized organization or authorized individual entrepreneur, importer) in relation to indefinite number of consumers.
At the time of the plaintiff’s appeal to the court – on May 31, 2016, the corresponding order of the CJSC “Transport Agency” “On the collection of fees for the design of shipments using plastic cards” was canceled.
Thus, the Office of Rospotrebnadzor for the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug – Ugra was not granted the right to appeal to the court with demands to declare the activity illegal as an independent claim, this requirement could only be an integral part of the basic requirement to terminate such activity.
