Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences. 2017. Issue 3 (37)

V. V. Stepanov,
Perm State University

 10.17072/1995-4190-2015-1-133-140

Introduction: the paper considers the issues of court redress to a consumer of a utility resource due to the establishment of an unreasonable price (tariff) or unjust standard consumption rate by a regulatory legal act. Purpose: to develop a proposal to improve the procedural legislation and its application by general jurisdiction courts and arbitration courts in the appropriate category of cases. Methods: the methodological framework of the research is based on the dialectical method of scientific cognition. The author uses both general scientific methods (analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction) and specific scientific methods (formal-legal and comparative law ones). Results: the paper analyzes the practice of application of civil and procedural law by the courts when considering cases involving damages for the overpayment to a utility resource consumer due to unreasonable prices (tariffs) or unjust standard consumption rate being established by a regulatory legal act. It defines the main contradictions and flaws, including those caused by the imperfection of the current legislation. Conclusions: in a situation when public authorities set an illegal tariff or standard consumption rate for a utility resource, it is possible to protect the consumer’s rights by filing a claim against the supplier for recovery of unjust enrichment as well as by making a claim against the public entity for the damages to be paid from its treasury. To provide the complete constitutional right to judicial protection, there should be made some amendments to the provisions of clause 1 of Part 4 of Article 392 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Fe­deration, clause 1, Part 3 of Article 311 of the Commercial Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, clause 1, Part 1 of Article 350 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of the Russian Federation for reviewing judicial acts in the cases when regulatory legal acts are recognized as invalid from the date other than the date of their publication. It is also necessary to specify the grounds for recognition of a regulatory legal act as invalid from a particular date in the Code of Administrative Procedure of the Russian Federation.

1. Burkov A. L. Akty sudebnogo normokontrolya kak istochnik administrativnogo prava: avtoref. dis. ... kand. yurid. nauk [Judicial Acts of the Court Compliance Assessment as the Source of Administrative Law: Synopsis of Cand. jurid. sci. diss.]. Tyumen, 2005. 28 p. (In Russ.).
2. Efimenko E. Plenum Verkhovnogo suda khochet raz"yasnit', kak sudam shchitat tarify na elektroenergiyu [The Plenum of the Supreme Court Clarifies How Courts Should Calculate Electricity Tariffs]. Available at: http://pravo.ru/court_report/view/136669 (accessed 09.01.2017). (In Russ.).
3. Zaytsev R. V. Vidy sudebnogo normokontrolya [The Types of the Court Compliance Assessment]. Rossiyskiy sud'ya – Russian Judge. 2003. Issue 4. Pp. 4–8. (In Russ.).
4. Len'shina N. G. Dokazyvanie i raspredelenie bremeni dokazyvaniya v delakh ob osparivanii normativnykh aktov v sfere energosnabzheniya [Proof and Apportionment of the Burdens in the Cases of Challenging Normative Acts in the Energy Supply]. Arbitrazhnye spory – Arbitration Disputes. 2013. Issue 3. Pp. 65–84. (In Russ.).
5. Len'shina N. G. Pravo na sudebnuyu zashchitu po delam ob osparivanii tarifnykh resheniy i vzyskanii ubytkov, voznikshikh v svyazi s prinyatiem ekonomicheski neobosnovannykh tarifnykh resheniy [The Right to Judicial Protection in the Cases of Challenging the Tariff Decisions and Recovering the Damages Caused by the Economically Unreasonable Tariff Decisions]. Arbitrazhnye spory – Arbitration Disputes. 2016. Issue 2. Pp. 122–128. (In Russ.).
6. Nikitin S. V. Sudebnyy kontrol' za normativnymi pravovymi aktami v grazhdanskom i arbitrazhnom protsesse [Judicial Control over Regulatory Legal Acts in Civil and Arbitral Procedure]. Moscow, 2010. 304 p. (In Russ.).
7. Yarkov V. V. Dopustimo li sudebnoe osparivanie normativnykh pravovykh aktov (ili ikh otdel'nykh polozheniy), utrativshikh silu? [Is a Judicial Review of Normative Legal Acts (or Their Separate Provisions) Become Inoperative Permissible?]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protses¬sa – Herald of Civil Procedure. 2016. Issue 2. Pp. 44–64. (In Russ.).