Issue 1 (15) 2012

THE PROBLEM OF ADMINISTRATIVE AND CIVIL LIABILITY IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ECONOMIC ENTITIES IN THE ABSENCE OF A LICENCE

THE PROBLEM OF ADMINISTRATIVE AND CIVIL LIABILITY IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ECONOMIC ENTITIES IN THE ABSENCE OF A LICENCE

V.V. Kvanina

South Ural State University
76, Lenina av., Chelyabinsk, 454080
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

The article based on the analysis of judicial practice administrative and civil penalties provided for carrying out activities without a license. The article considers the questions of goals and criteria of licesing. Author comes to conclusion about public nature of licesing process. That is why the penalties for carrying out activities without a license are firstly public – administrative and criminal. Administrative penalty submitted by art. 14.01 as a fine and confiscation of manufactured products and instruments of production and raw materials or administrative suspension of activity for up to ninety days. Criminal penalty aren’t considered in this article, because entities can’t be the subject of the crime.

Whereas the process of reception of a license considered as a foundation of entity’s capacity carrying out activities without a license leads to application of civil penalties. They are: liquidation of the entity and recognition of the contract as invalid. Author comes to conclusion that liquidation of the entity protects public order and can’t defend contractor’s interests. The proofs of this conclusion are a circle of persons entitled to claim on the liquidation of a legal person – there are no counterparts of economic entities.

Another civil penalty for carrying out activities without a license – recognition of the contract as invalid also analyzed in this article. It is known that transaction made by a legal person who has no license for the relevant activity may be deemed invalid by a court at the suit of the legal entity, its founder (participant) or a public body exercising control or supervision of the entity, if it is proved that the other party the transaction knew or should have known about its illegality (art. 173 of the Civil Code). Author concludes that provisions of Art. 173 of the Civil Code provides for unscrupulous entities - performers, as they may at any time as necessary “to overturn” the deal and return to its original position (unless it is proved that the other party to the transaction knew or should have known about it illegality).

In conclusion author comes to the idea of inadequacy of mechanisms for the protection of public and private interests, which requires a permit in law.

Keywords: administrative and civil liability for carrying out activities without a license

Bibliograficheskij spisok

1. Braginskij M.I., Vitrjanskij V.V. Dogovornoe pravo. Izd. dop., ispravl. (2-j zavod). M.: Statut, 2002. Kn. 3: Dogovory o vypolnenii rabot i okazanii uslug. 1055 s.

2. Grazhdanskij kodeks Rossijskoj Federacii (chast' vtoraja): Feder. zakon ot 26 janv. 1996 g. №14-FZ // Sobr. zakonodatel'stva Ros. Federacii. 1996. №5, st. 410.

3. Grazhdanskij kodeks Rossijskoj Federacii (chast' pervaja): Feder. zakon ot 30 nojabrja 1994 g. №51-FZ // Sobr. zakonodatel'stva Ros. Federacii. 1994. №32, st. 3301.

4. Grazhdanskoe pravo: uchebnik; v 3 t. / E.N. Abramova, N.N. Averchenko, Ju.V. Bajgusheva i dr.; pod red. A.P. Sergeeva. M.: TK “Velbi”, 2009. T. 1. 1008 s.

5. Kodeks Rossijskoj Federacii ob administrativnyh pravonarushenijah: Feder. zakon Ros. Federacii ot 30 dek. 2001 g. №195-FZ // Sobr. zakonodatel'stva Ros. Federacii. 2002. №1 (ch. 1), st. 1.

6. Obzor otdel'nyh postanovlenij Prezidiuma VAS RF po voprosam licenzirovanija (Izlozhenie) // Hozjajstvo i pravo. 2002. №2. S. 128.

7. Obzor praktiki razreshenija sporov, svjazannyh s likvidaciej juridicheskih lic (kommercheskih organizacij): inform. pis'mo Prezidiuma VAS RF ot 13 janv. 2000 g. №50 // Vestn. VAS RF. 2000. №3. S. 24.

8. O zawite konkurencii: Feder. zakon Ros. Federacii ot 26 ijulja 2006 g. №135-FZ // Sobr. zakonodatel'stva Ros. Federacii. 2006. №31 (ch. 1), st. 3434.

9. O licenzirovanii otdel'nyh vidov dejatel'nosti: Feder. zakon Ros. Federacii ot 4 maja 2011 g. №99-FZ // Sobr. zakonodatel'stva Ros. Federacii. 2011. №19, st. 271.

10. O nekotoryh voprosah, voznikajuwih pri primenenii Kodeksa Rossijskoj Federacii ob administrativnyh pravonarushenijah (v red. ot 10 ijunja 2010 g. №13) [Jelektronnyj resurs]: postanovlenie Plenuma Verhovnogo suda RF ot 24 marta 2005 g. №5. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoj sistemy «Garant».

11. O primenenii punktov 2 i 4 stat'i 61 Grazhdanskogo kodeksa Rossijskoj Federacii» [Jelektronnyj resurs]: inform. pis'mo Prezidiuma VAS RF ot 5 dek. 1997 g. №23. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoj sistemy «Garant».

12. O sdelkah juridicheskogo lica, registracija kotorogo priznana nedejstvitel'noj [Jelektronnyj resurs]: inform. pis'mo Prezidiuma VAS RF ot 9 ijunja 2000 g. №54. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoj sistemy «Garant».

13. O rynke cennyh bumag: Feder. zakon Ros. Federacii ot 22 apr. 1996 g. №39-FZ // Sobr. zakonodatel'stva Ros. Federacii. 1996. №17, st. 1918.

14. Po delu o proverke konstitucionnosti polozhenij stat'i 35 Federal'nogo zakona «Ob akcionernyh obwestvah», statej 61 i 99 Grazhdanskogo kodeksa Rossijskoj Federacii, stat'i 31 Nalogovogo kodeksa Rossijskoj Federacii i stat'i 14 Arbitrazhnogo processual'nogo kodeksa Rossijskoj Federacii v svjazi s zhalobami grazhdanina A.B. Borisova, ZAO «Media-Most» i ZAO «Moskovskaja Nezavisimaja Vewatel'naja korporacija»: postanovlenie Konstitucionnogo cuda Ros. Federacii ot 18 ijulja 2003 g. №14-AP // Sobr. zakonodatel'stva Ros. Federacii. 2003. №30, st. 3102.

15. Postanovlenie Prezidiuma Vysshego Arbitrazhnogo suda Ros. Federacii ot 22 okt. 1996 g. № 3411/96 // Vest. VAS RF. 1997. №2. S. 91–92; postanovlenie Prezidiuma Vysshego arbitrazhnogo suda RF ot 14 ijulja 1998 g. №1173/98 // Vestn. VAS RF. 1998. №11. S. 55–57; postanovlenie FAS Ural'skogo okruga ot 6 fevr. 2008 g. №F09-10567/07-S5 [Jelektronnyj resurs]. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoj sistemy «Garant».

16. Postanovlenie semnadcatogo arbitrazhnogo apelljacionnogo suda ot 29 dek. 2011 g. №17-AP-128/11; postanovlenie dvenadcatogo arbitrazhnogo apelljacionnogo suda ot 19 janv. 2012 g. № 12AP-8627/11; postanovlenie vos'mogo arbitrazhnogo apelljacionnogo suda ot 8 ijulja 2009 g. №08AP-2842/2009; postanovlenie Federal'nogo arbitrazhnogo suda Severo-Zapadnogo okruga ot 2 marta 2009 g. №A44-2177/2008; postanovlenie Federal'nogo arbitrazhnogo suda Ural'skogo okruga ot 8 fevr. 2010 № F09-184/10-S1 po delu №A07-20236/2009; postanovlenie Federal'nogo arbitrazhnogo suda Ural'skogo okruga ot 6 nojabrja 2010 g. №F09-7895/10-S1 [Jelektronnyj resurs]. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoj sistemy «Garant».

17. Postanovlenie Federal'nogo arbitrazhnogo suda Vostochno-Sibirskogo okruga ot 15 marta 2011 g. po delu №A33-9410/2010; postanovlenie Federal'nogo arbitrazhnogo suda Central'nogo okruga ot 12 marta 2009 g. №A68-4678-59/GP-1-08 [Jelektronnyj resurs]. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoj sistemy «Garant».

18. Proekt GK RF [Jelektronnyj resurs]. URL: http://www.rg.ru (data obrawenija: 07.02.2012).

19. Rossijskoe grazhdanskoe pravo: uchebnik; v 2 t. / otv. red. E.A. Suhanov. M.: Statut, 2010. T. 1: Obwaja chast'. Vewnoe pravo. Nasledstvennoe pravo. Intellektual'nye prava. Lichnye neimuwestvennye prava. 958 s.

20. Ugolovnyj kodeks Rossijskoj Federacii: Feder. zakon Ros. Federacii ot 13 ijunja 1996. №63-FZ // Sobr. zakonodatel'stva Ros. Federacii. 1996. №25, st. 2954.