Russian Compensation for Harm

General Principles

The law of compensation for harm (vozmeshchenie vreda) in Russia is codified in Chapter 59 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (Articles 1064–1101), titled Obligations Arising from the Causing of Harm. The general principle, established by Article 1064(1), is that harm caused to the person or property of a citizen, or harm caused to the property of a legal entity, is subject to full compensation by the person who caused the harm. Article 1064(2) establishes a presumption of fault: the person who caused the harm is presumed to be at fault unless they prove otherwise.

Fault (vina) in Russian tort law encompasses both intent (umysel) and negligence (neostorozhnost). The standard of fault is defined objectively: fault exists where the tortfeasor failed to exercise the degree of care required by law or contract. The presumption of fault is a distinctive feature of Russian tort law, shifting the burden of proof to the defendant. The victim must prove the fact of harm, the unlawful character of the defendant’s conduct, and the causal connection between the conduct and the harm.

Article 1064 — General Tort

Article 1064 serves as the residual rule governing all tort claims not specifically regulated elsewhere in the Civil Code. The provision creates a general tort of causing harm by unlawful conduct (prichinenie vreda protivopravnymi deystviyami). The unlawfulness requirement may be satisfied by violation of a statutory prohibition, breach of a contractual duty, or infringement of a subjective right.

The compensation principle distinguishes between actual damage (realny ushcherb) and lost profit (ushchublennaya vygoda), both of which are recoverable under Article 15 of the Civil Code, which defines losses (ubytki). Actual damage includes expenses the victim has incurred or will incur to restore the injured right, loss of or damage to property, and expenses for medical treatment or funeral costs. Lost profit includes income that the victim would have received under ordinary conditions of civil turnover.

Sources of Increased Danger

Article 1079 of the Civil Code establishes strict liability for harm caused by a source of increased danger (istochnik povyshennoy opasnosti). The provision is one of the most frequently applied tort rules in Russian practice. The concept of source of increased danger encompasses: vehicles (including cars, trains, aircraft, and ships); industrial machinery and equipment; high-voltage electricity; nuclear materials; toxic chemicals and biological agents; construction activities; and other activities over which the actor cannot exercise complete control.

The owner (vladelets) of the source of increased danger is strictly liable regardless of fault. The owner is defined as the person who holds the source on the basis of ownership, lease, power of attorney, or other legal basis. Liability may be reduced or excluded only where the harm resulted from force majeure (nepreodolimaya sila) — extraordinary and unavoidable events — or the intent (umysel) of the victim. Gross negligence of the victim may reduce the amount of compensation but does not exclude liability entirely.

Where multiple sources of increased danger cause harm jointly, their owners bear joint and several liability (solidarnaya otvetstvennost). The Supreme Court has issued detailed guidance on Article 1079 in its Resolution No. 1 of 26 January 2010, providing interpretation on the definition of sources of increased danger, the concept of owner, the scope of liability, and the allocation of fault.

Vicarious Liability

Russian law recognises vicarious liability (otvetstvennost za deystviya tretikh lits) in several contexts. Article 1068 of the Civil Code makes a legal entity or individual entrepreneur liable for harm caused by their employees in the performance of labour duties. The employer is liable regardless of whether the employee’s conduct was within the scope of employment, provided the conduct was connected to the performance of work duties.

State and municipal bodies are liable for harm caused by their officials under Articles 1069–1071. The liability of the Russian Federation arises for unlawful acts of state bodies, local self-government bodies, and their officials, including the issuance of unlawful normative or individual acts. Liability is strict in the sense that the victim need not prove fault of the specific official. Compensation is paid from the federal treasury, the regional treasury, or the municipal treasury, depending on the body responsible.

Article 1073 establishes liability for harm caused by minors: parents, adoptive parents, or guardians are liable for harm caused by minors under 14 years. For minors aged 14 to 18, the minors themselves are primarily liable, with the parents bearing subsidiary liability (subsidiarnaya otvetstvennost) where the minor lacks sufficient funds. Educational, medical, and social institutions exercising temporary supervision are liable for harm caused by minors while under their supervision.

Compensation for Damage to Property

The principle of full compensation applies to damage to property. Under Article 15 of the Civil Code, the victim is entitled to the restoration of their property rights to the position they would have occupied had the tort not occurred. Compensation may be paid in money or, where possible, by restoring the damaged property. The court determines the amount of compensation based on the market value of the damaged property at the time of the decision.

Special rules govern compensation for damage to the environment. The Federal Law on Environmental Protection (No. 7-FZ of 10 January 2002) establishes a regime of strict liability for environmental harm, with compensation calculated according to approved methodology rather than the general rules of Chapter 59. The methodology applies to harm caused to land, water bodies, forests, and atmospheric air.

Moral Harm

Article 151 of the Civil Code establishes the right to compensation for moral harm (moralny vred) — physical or moral suffering caused by acts infringing personal non-property rights of a citizen or encroaching on intangible benefits. The concept of moral harm includes: physical pain; psychological distress, fear, humiliation, and shame; suffering caused by the loss of a relative, the inability to continue an active social life, the disclosure of family or medical secrets; and distress caused by violation of the right to work, housing, or other rights.

The amount of compensation for moral harm is determined by the court, applying the principles of reasonableness and fairness (razumnost i spravedlivost). The court considers: the character and degree of the victim’s suffering; the degree of the defendant’s fault; the individual characteristics of the victim; and the circumstances of the case. There are no fixed tariffs for moral harm in Russian law; compensation awards have historically been modest, typically ranging from 10,000 to 500,000 RUB for most violations. The Constitutional Court, however, has held that compensation must be meaningful and not merely symbolic. Moral harm is not compensable to legal entities; only natural persons may claim.