» »

Arbitration Court of the Orenburg Region. Arbitration Court of the Orenburg Region Violation of mandatory requirements of state standards

Voluntary certification

For products that are not subject to mandatory certification in accordance with the legislative acts of the Russian Federation, and for the requirements for compliance with which the legislative acts of the Russian Federation do not provide for mandatory certification, on the initiative legal entities and citizens, voluntary certification can be carried out on the terms of an agreement between the applicant and the certification body.

Voluntary certification is entitled to be carried out by any legal entity that has assumed the function of a voluntary certification body and registered the certification system and the mark of conformity with the State Standard of Russia in the manner prescribed by the State Standard of Russia. Mandatory certification bodies are also entitled to conduct voluntary certification subject to the specified conditions. The voluntary certification body establishes the rules for carrying out work in the certification system, including the procedure for their payment.

When concluding a contract for certification, the applicant has the right to receive from the voluntary certification body the necessary information about the rules for product certification, as well as determine the form of certification.

    Responsibility for violation of certification rules

Legal and individuals, as well as government bodies guilty of violating the rules of mandatory certification, bear criminal, administrative or civil liability in accordance with applicable law.

Since this year, liability for violation of certification rules has become a little tougher.

For violating clear requirements state standards and non-compliance with the certification rules, the responsible person is usually fined. In addition, the organization (or private entrepreneur) will have to suspend its activities. The period of suspension of activities depends on the degree of complexity of the violation and can be up to ninety days.

In addition to administrative liability (which is established by the Code of Administrative Offenses), there is also criminal liability for violation of certification rules (established by the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and some laws related to illegal trade).

Let's take a closer look at criminal liability and penalties.

According to Article 157 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, for the release and subsequent sale of goods that do not meet all safety requirements, the organization is criminally liable, punishable by imprisonment for up to 3 years or a fine up to several times the minimum wage. If the punished person has previously been involved in the same violations, then the term of imprisonment may increase up to 8 years. Sometimes accompanied by confiscation of property and deprivation of the right to hold certain positions, as well as forced suspension of activities.

The sale of goods whose quality does not meet the requirements of standards, or the sale of goods in violation of sanitary and hygienic conditions, is punishable in accordance with article 146. In this case, a fine of 3 to 25 minimum wages is imposed.

(For a complete list of responsibilities and penalties, see Appendix 1.)

In addition to these laws, there are special laws of certification bodies - the State Standard, the State Sanitary and Epidemiological Supervision, the State Trade Inspectorate, etc.

Gosstandart has the authority to stop the production and sale of goods, withdraw from production and withdraw from circulation all products. Gosstandart also has the right to impose fines for different types violations: causing harm to the consumer (a fine in the amount of the damage caused), for evading payments, etc.

Gosstandart considers the following actions to be causing damage to the consumer:

Sale of expired goods;

Sale of goods, the production of which was not observed necessary rules resulting in products that do not meet safety requirements;

Sale of non-certified goods subject to mandatory certification.

Conclusion

As can be seen from the above, the responsibility for violating the certification rules is quite serious, so many company executives and private entrepreneurs are very strict about this. It is for this reason that specialists of certification centers explain this to their clients in an accessible and mandatory manner and are clearly aware of their responsibility for violating certification rules.

Bibliography

    THEM. Lifits. Fundamentals of standardization of metrology and certification.

2nd edition, revised and enlarged. Moscow, Yurayt-M LLC 2001

    Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation 2009

    Responsibility for violation of the requirements of mandatory certification and standardization. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: http:// biznesadvokat.ru

    Department legal services– Consulting. Responsibility for violation of certification rules. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: http:// expert-kollegia.ru

Application

Annex 1. Table. Responsibility for violation of the requirements of mandatory certification and standardization.

Violation

Punishment

Administrative responsibility

Violation of the mandatory requirements of state standards, for except in cases provided for in Articles 6.14, 8.23, 9.4, Part 1 of Article 12.2, Part 2 of Article 13.4, Article 13.8, Part 1 of Article 14.4, Article 20.4 of this Code, upon sale (supply, sale), use (operation), storage, transportation or disposal products, as well as evading the presentation of products, documents or information necessary for the implementation of state control and supervision

Fine for officials in the amount of 5 to 10 minimum wages; for legal entities - from 50 to 100 minimum wages.

Part 1 of Article 19.19 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation

Violation of the rules for mandatory certification, with the exception of cases provided for in Article 13.6, parts 2 and 4 of Article 13.12, part 2 of Article 14.4, part 2 of Article 14.16, Articles 20.4, 20.14 of this Code, that is, the sale of certified products that do not meet the requirements normative documents for compliance with which it is certified, or the sale of certified products without a certificate of conformity (declaration of conformity), or without a mark of conformity, or without indicating in the accompanying technical documentation information about certification or regulatory documents that the specified product must comply with, or failure to provide this information to the consumer (buyer, customer), as well as the presentation of unreliable product test results or the unreasonable issuance of a certificate of conformity (declaration of conformity) for products subject to mandatory certification

Fine for officials in the amount of 10 to 20 minimum wages; for legal entities - from 200 to 300 minimum wages.

With confiscation of objects of an administrative offense

Part 2 of Article 19.19 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation

Violation of the rules for verification of measuring instruments, the requirements of certified measurement procedures, requirements for the state of standards, established units of quantities or metrological rules and norms in trade, as well as the release, sale, rental or use of measuring instruments, the types of which are not approved, or the use of unverified means measurements

Fine for officials in the amount of 5 to 10 minimum wages; for legal entities - from 50 to 100 minimum wages

Part 3 Article 19.19 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation

Sale of goods, performance of work or provision of services to the public that do not meet the requirements of standards, specifications or samples in terms of quality, completeness or packaging

A fine for citizens in the amount of 10 to 15 minimum wages; for officials - from 20 to 30 minimum wages; for legal entities - from 200 to 300 minimum wages

Part 1, Article 14.4 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation

Sale of goods, performance of work or provision of services to the population in violation of sanitary rules or without a certificate of conformity (declaration of conformity) certifying (certifying) the safety of such goods, works or services for the life and health of people

A fine for citizens in the amount of 20 to 25 minimum wages with or without confiscation of goods;

for officials - from 40 to 50 minimum wages;

on persons engaged in entrepreneurial activities without the formation of a legal entity. persons - from 40 to 50 minimum wages with or without confiscation of goods or administrative suspension of activities for up to 90 days with or without confiscation of goods;

for legal entities - from 400 to 500 minimum wages with or without confiscation of goods or administrative suspension of activities for up to 90 days with or without confiscation of goods

Part 2, Article 14.4 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation

Criminal liability

Production, purchase, storage, transportation for the purpose of sale or sale of unmarked goods and products that are subject to mandatory labeling with excise duty stamps, special stamps or conformity marks protected from counterfeit, committed on a large scale

A fine of up to 200 thousand rubles or in the amount of the wage or other income of the convicted person for a period of up to 18 months, or imprisonment for a term of up to 3 years with a fine of up to 80 thousand rubles or in the amount of wages or other income of the convicted person for a period of up to 6 months

Part 1 of Article 171.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

The same acts (specified in paragraph 6 of the Table) committed:

a) an organized group;

c) on a large scale

A fine in the amount of 100,000 to 300,000 rubles or in the amount of the wage or other income of the convicted person for a period of 1 to 2 years, or imprisonment for a term of 2 to 6 years with a fine of up to 1 million rubles, or the amount of wages or other income of the convicted person for a period of up to 5 years or without it

Part 2 of article 171.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

Manufacture, storage or transportation for the purpose of sale or sale of goods and products, performance of work or provision of services that do not meet the safety requirements of the life or health of consumers, as well as illegal issuance or use of an official document certifying the compliance of these goods, works or services with safety requirements

A fine in the amount of up to 300 thousand rubles or in the amount of the wage or other income of the convicted person for a period of up to 2 years, or by restriction of liberty for a term of up to 2 years, or by deprivation of liberty for a term of up to 2 years

Part 1 of Article 238 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

The same acts (specified in paragraph 10 of the Table), if they:

a) committed by a group of persons by prior agreement or by an organized group;

c) committed in relation to goods, works or services intended for children under the age of six;

d) entailed by negligence the infliction of grievous bodily harm or death of a person

A fine in the amount of 100,000 to 500,000 rubles or in the amount of the wage or other income of the convicted person for a period of 1 to 3 years, or by restriction of liberty for a term of up to 3 years, or by deprivation of liberty for a term of up to 6 years, with a fine of in the amount of up to 500 thousand rubles or in the amount of wages or other income of the convicted person for a period of up to 3 years or without it

For violation of requirements technical regulations the manufacturer (executor, seller, person performing the functions of a foreign manufacturer) is liable in accordance with the law Russian Federation.

If, as a result of non-compliance of products with the requirements of technical regulations, violations of the requirements of technical regulations in the implementation of the processes of production, operation, storage, transportation, sale and disposal, harm has been caused to the life or health of citizens, property of individuals or legal entities, state or municipal property, the environment, life or health of animals and plants, or there is a threat of causing such harm, the manufacturer (performer, seller, person performing the functions of a foreign manufacturer) is obliged to compensate for the harm caused and take measures to prevent harm to other persons, their property, the environment in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation. The obligation to compensate for harm cannot be limited by an agreement or a statement by one of the parties. Agreements or disclaimers are void.

The manufacturer (executor, seller, person performing the functions of a foreign manufacturer) who has become aware of the non-compliance of the products put into circulation with the requirements of technical regulations is obliged to report this to the authority state control(supervision) in accordance with its competence within ten days from the date of receipt of the said information. The seller (executor, person performing the functions of a foreign manufacturer) who has received the specified information is obliged to bring it to the manufacturer within ten days. A person who is not a manufacturer (performer, seller, person performing the functions of a foreign manufacturer) and who has become aware of the non-compliance of products released into circulation with the requirements of technical regulations, has the right to send information about the non-compliance of products with the requirements of technical regulations to the state control (supervision) body. Upon receipt of such information, the state control (supervision) body is obliged to notify the manufacturer (seller, person performing the functions of a foreign manufacturer) of its receipt within five days. Within ten days from the date of receipt of information about non-compliance of products with the requirements of technical regulations, if the need to establish a longer period does not follow from the essence of the measures taken, the manufacturer (seller, person performing the functions of a foreign manufacturer) is obliged to verify the accuracy of the information received. At the request of the state control (supervision) body, the manufacturer (seller, person performing the functions of a foreign manufacturer) is obliged to submit the materials of the said inspection to the state control (supervision) body.

In the event of receipt of information about non-compliance of products with the requirements of technical regulations, the manufacturer (seller, person performing the functions of a foreign manufacturer) is obliged to take the necessary measures so that before the completion of the check, the possible harm associated with the circulation of this product does not increase. When confirming the accuracy of information about non-compliance of products with the requirements of technical regulations, the manufacturer (seller, person performing the functions of a foreign manufacturer), within ten days from the date of confirmation of the reliability of such information, is obliged to develop a program of measures to prevent harm and coordinate it with the state control (supervision) body in according to his competence. The program should include measures to inform purchasers about the presence of a threat of harm and ways to prevent it, as well as the timing of the implementation of such measures. If it is necessary to incur additional costs to prevent damage, the manufacturer (seller, person acting as a foreign manufacturer) is obliged to take all measures to prevent damage on its own, and if it is impossible to implement them, announce a recall of the products and compensate for the losses caused to the purchasers due to a product recall. Elimination of deficiencies, as well as delivery of products to the place of elimination of deficiencies and return to purchasers are carried out by the manufacturer (seller, person performing the functions of a foreign manufacturer) and at his expense.

If the threat of harm cannot be eliminated, the manufacturer (seller, person acting as a foreign manufacturer) is obliged to immediately suspend the production and sale of products, recall the products and compensate the purchasers for losses incurred in connection with the recall of the products. In case of non-compliance with the instructions or non-compliance with the program of measures to prevent causing harm, the state control (supervision) body in accordance with its competence, as well as other persons who became aware of the failure by the manufacturer (seller, person performing the functions of a foreign manufacturer) of the program of measures to prevent causing harm, has the right to apply to the court with a claim for a forced recall of products. If the claim for a forced recall of products is satisfied, the court obliges the defendant to take certain actions related to the recall of products within the time period established by the court, as well as to bring the court decision no later than one month from the date of its entry into legal force to the attention of the purchasers through the mass media or otherwise. way. If the defendant fails to comply with the court decision within the prescribed period, the plaintiff has the right to perform these actions at the expense of the defendant with the recovery of the necessary expenses from him. For violation of the requirements of the law on product recall, criminal and administrative measures may be applied in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation. When exercising state supervision over compliance with the mandatory requirements of state standards and over certified products (services), state inspectors for the supervision of state standards of the territorial bodies of the State Standard, on the basis of acts of inspection of enterprises, take measures aimed at suppressing, eliminating and preventing violations and the causes that caused them. For this purpose, in accordance with PR 50.1.007, they issue prescriptions to violators and impose penalties for violating the mandatory requirements of standards, certification rules and non-compliance with prescriptions.

The instructions may be as follows:

  • 1) on the elimination of identified violations of mandatory requirements, in particular safety requirements (when violations can be eliminated). For evasion of execution or untimely execution, fines of up to 5000 are applied. minimum dimensions wages (hereinafter - the minimum wage);
  • 2) on the suspension of the sale of manufactured products, the provision of services in case of their non-compliance with the mandatory requirements of state standards. For evasion of execution, a fine is applied in the amount of the cost of products (services) sold or in the amount of up to 10 thousand rubles;
  • 3) on the termination of the release (when the causes of harm to products cannot be eliminated) and the sale of dangerous goods. For evasion of execution, a fine of up to 5,000 minimum wages is applied;
  • 4) on recall of dangerous goods from consumers. For failure to comply with the order or causing damage to these goods, a fine of up to 5,000 minimum wages is imposed.

For violation of the rules of mandatory certification of goods (works, services), fines are imposed on certification bodies (CB) in the amount of twice the cost of the relevant goods (works, services). Violation of the rules may result in the unreasonable issuance of a certificate of conformity:

with negative test results;

if the compliance of goods (works, services) with the requirements of standards is not proven (for example, the test program was not observed, tests were not carried out according to all safety requirements);

when the certificate of conformity is issued for goods (works, services) that are not included in the scope of accreditation of the certification body;

when the certificate of conformity is issued by the certification body after the expiration of its accreditation certificate, its suspension or cancellation.

Fines are imposed on testing laboratories (TL) and centers in the amount of twice the cost of the relevant goods (works, services) for providing unreliable test results for goods (works, services) during their mandatory certification.

Cases on the imposition of fines are considered with the participation of representatives of the subject economic activity, manufacturer (executor, seller), OS, IL, other interested parties within 15 days from the date of receipt of the inspection report.

The Law of the Russian Federation "On Certification of Products and Services" states that legal entities and individuals, as well as federal executive authorities guilty of violating mandatory certification, in accordance with applicable law, bear criminal, administrative or civil liability. In the Law of the Russian Federation " On Standardization” also provides for criminal, administrative and civil liability for violation of the provisions of the law, in particular for non-compliance with the mandatory requirements of state standards.

In accordance with Art. 170 of the Code of the RSFSR on administrative offenses on officials or citizens registered as individual entrepreneurs, for violation of the mandatory requirements of state standards, mandatory certification rules, a fine of 5 to 100 minimum wages is imposed. At the same time, such actions are qualified as violations of the rules of mandatory certification, such as:

sale of certified products that do not meet the requirements ND,

for which it is certified;

sale of certified products without a certificate of conformity or without indication in the accompanying technical documentation information about certification or ND, which must comply with the specified products; or failure to communicate this information to the consumer (buyer, customer);

22.05.2006

For many years, the mandatory requirements of state standards have been contained in departmental regulatory legal acts and regulatory and technical documents: state and industry standards (GOSTs, OSTs), building codes and regulations (SniPakh, SP, etc.), sanitary standards and rules (SANPiNakh, SanP) , guidance documents, guidelines and other rules.

The standard is the main regulatory and technical document containing a complete description of products: a range of indicators of its quality, the level of each of them, methods and measuring instruments, rules for labeling, acceptance, transportation and storage of products.

Being interested in the production of standard products, the state made the standards mandatory by fixing the indicators of the standards in legal acts. Thus, the standards were equated with legal norms, the observance of which became the responsibility of the persons concerned.

With acceptance federal law dated December 27, 2002 No. 184-FZ “On technical regulation”, the previous system of technical regulation has radically changed; the main regulatory legal acts on which this system was based, and the by-laws adopted in pursuance of them, have become invalid, including the laws of the Russian Federation “On Standardization”, “On Certification of Products and Services”. Thus, the transition from "quality" as the main object of state regulation and control to the "safety" of consumer goods was completed.

On July 1, 2002, the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation entered into force. It became the only federal legislative act that establishes liability for administrative offenses, including violation of the mandatory requirements of state standards.

Article 6.14 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation provides for the liability of officials and legal entities for the production or circulation of ethyl alcohol, alcoholic or alcohol-containing products that do not meet the requirements of state standards, sanitary rules and hygiene standards. Organizations may be responsible individual entrepreneurs those engaged in the purchase (import), supply (export), storage or retail sale of the said products, as well as their officials (persons equal to them). In Art. 6.14 the content of the objective side of the offense is formulated in the same way for all the named subjects. The sanction of this article provides for the imposition of various fines on officials (from 40 to 50 minimum wages) and legal entities (from 1000 to 2000 minimum wages) with confiscation of products.

Responsibility is subject to officials whose duties include organizing and monitoring compliance with the relevant requirements for products.
The question of subjects held liable under Art. 6.14 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation. Arbitration courts in a number of districts have held that this article provides for liability industrial manufacturer or a supplier of alcoholic products that do not meet state standards, but not retailer. The federal arbitration courts of other districts considered such a conclusion to be inconsistent with the legislation of the Russian Federation. This issue was resolved in the process of law enforcement.
The inspection of the Federal Tax Service of Russia, as a result of checking a store owned by an entrepreneur, established the fact of the sale and storage of alcoholic products - Yantarny Sherry wine with the presence of foreign inclusions in the form of a suspension of crystalline mass, about which an act was drawn up. On the basis of the withdrawal protocol, the indicated products were withdrawn and, in accordance with the decision on the appointment of a sanitary and hygienic examination, were sent to the state institution "Center for State Sanitary and Epidemiological Surveillance" for research. An administrative offense case was initiated against the entrepreneur and an administrative investigation was appointed.
According to the expert opinion, the content of foreign inclusions unacceptable for this product was found in the investigated alcoholic products, which is a violation of clause 2.2.1 of GOST 7208-93; such products are not subject to sale in the retail network.

Upon completion of the administrative investigation, the inspectorate drew up a protocol on an administrative offense under Art. 6.14 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, the materials of the administrative case were sent to the arbitration court.

The decision of the Court of First Instance dated 28.02.2005. (Arbitration court Krasnodar Territory case No. A32-4984 / 05-23 / 132-1AP) the proceedings were terminated on the basis of paragraph 1 of part 1 of Art. 150 APC RF. Terminating the proceedings, the court held that Art. 6.14 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation provides for the liability of an industrial manufacturer or supplier of alcoholic products that do not meet state standards, and not a retailer, and came to the conclusion that the actions of an entrepreneur contain an administrative offense under Part 3 of Art. 14.16 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, namely the violation of other rules for the retail sale of alcoholic and alcohol-containing products. By virtue of Art. 23.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation of the case on bringing to administrative responsibility, under Part 3 of Art. 14.16 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, are not under the jurisdiction of the arbitration court.
The decisions of the Court of Appeal dated 27.04.2005. case No. А32-4984/05-23/132-1AP and the cassation instance (decree of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North Caucasian District dated June 27, 2005 on this case), the ruling of the court of first instance was left unchanged.

By Resolution No. 9451/05 of December 20, 2005, the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation canceled the judicial acts, and the case was sent for a new trial to the first instance of the arbitration court. The Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation, canceling the judicial acts, referred to the following.

Responsibility for the production or circulation of ethyl alcohol, alcoholic or alcohol-containing products that do not meet the requirements of state standards, sanitary rules and hygiene standards is provided for by Art. 6.14 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation.

In Art. 2 of the Federal Law of November 22, 1995 No. 171-FZ “On state regulation production and turnover of ethyl alcohol, alcoholic and alcohol-containing products" (hereinafter - Law No. 171-FZ) defines the concept of "turnover of ethyl alcohol, alcoholic or alcohol-containing products", including purchase (including import), supply (including export) , storage and retail.

Does not meet government standards alcoholic products at the time of the check, it was in storage and sold at retail in the store, which confirms the fact that it is in circulation. The turnover of such alcoholic and alcohol-containing products, based on the meaning of Art. 25 of Law No. 171-FZ is illegal.

The courts have incorrectly concluded that Art. 6.14 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation does not provide for the liability of a retailer of alcoholic products that do not meet state standards.

Responsibility for offenses in three different, but closely related areas of activity: violation of the mandatory requirements of state standards, violation of the rules for mandatory product certification, violation of the requirements of regulatory documents to ensure unity - is provided for by Art. 19.19 Administrative Code of the Russian Federation.

In part 1 of Art. 19.19 establishes responsibility for two separate offenses: violation of the mandatory requirements of state standards in the implementation (supply, sale), use (operation), storage, transportation or disposal of products and evasion of the presentation of products, documents or information necessary for state control and supervision.

The scope of state control in this article is not defined. However, the establishment in this article of responsibility for violating the mandatory requirements of state standards allows us to talk about state control in this and only this area.

The question arises of administrative responsibility for the same actions in the exercise of state control over compliance with the mandatory requirements of sanitary, veterinary rules and other regulations.

Thus, LLC P applied to the Arbitration Court of the Orenburg Region with a statement to recognize as illegal the actions of officials of the state institution Orenburg city ​​government veterinary."

When resolving the dispute, the Arbitration Court established the following. On August 14, 2004, an unknown person traded mushrooms in the adjacent territory of the market, located along the road, with obvious signs of poor quality (foreign putrid smell, mucus on the surface of the mushrooms, damaged packaging). At the request of the employees of the city veterinary department to present documents confirming the quality and safety of the mushrooms sold, as well as documents confirming the status of the product owner, the seller refused and left the outlet.

Officials of the city veterinary department seized this product in order to prevent the further sale of mushrooms, since eating them could lead to food poisoning among the population. The State Veterinary Inspector drew up an act on the withdrawal from sale and use of low-quality and hazardous raw materials and food products(mushrooms champignons and oyster mushrooms). The State Veterinary Inspector drew up an act “On the removal from sale and use of low-quality and dangerous raw materials and food products” - champignon mushrooms and oyster mushrooms.
According to the applicant, the officials of the state institution “Orenburg City Veterinary Administration” were not authorized to carry out the check.
The powers in the field of veterinary medicine are established by the Law of the Russian Federation dated May 14, 1993 No. 4979-I “On Veterinary Medicine”, Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated September 29, 1997 No. 1263 “On Approval of the Regulations on the Examination of Low-Quality and Dangerous Food Raw Materials and Food Products, Their Use or Destruction” , Order of the Department of Veterinary Medicine of the Ministry of Agriculture and Food of Russia dated December 25, 1997 No. 36 “On the examination of low-quality products of animal origin and the procedure for their use or destruction”, according to which the state veterinary supervision bodies carry out an examination, determine the procedure for the use or destruction of low-quality and dangerous food raw materials and food products of animal and vegetable origin, control the availability and correctness of execution of veterinary accompanying documents, conduct an external inspection of a batch of products in order to establish its compliance accompanying documents, determine the presence of imprints of stamps, markings, the state of the package.

According to Art. 13 of the Federal Law of 02.01.2000 No. 29-FZ “On the Quality and Safety of Food Products”, state supervision and control in the field of ensuring the quality and safety of food products is entrusted to the bodies of the State Sanitary and Epidemiological Service of the Russian Federation, the bodies of the State Veterinary Service of the Russian Federation, the bodies of the State Grain inspections of the Russian Federation, bodies of the State Inspectorate for Trade, Quality of Goods and Services and Consumer Rights Protection of the Russian Federation, as well as bodies exercising state control in the field of standardization and certification.

Thus, the applicant's argument that the officials of the State Institution "Orenburg City Veterinary Administration" are not empowered to carry out control measures in relation to industrial products of plant origin contradicts the current legislation.

By virtue of Art. 15 of the Federal Law, food products intended for sale must satisfy the physiological needs of a person in the necessary substances and energy, meet the requirements usually imposed on food products in terms of organoleptic and physico-chemical indicators, and comply with the requirements established by regulatory documents for the permissible content of chemical (including radioactive), biological substances and their compounds, microorganisms and other biological organisms posing a risk to the health of present and future generations.

The applicant's assertion that the officials of the administrative body did not present documents certifying their authority, in connection with which the seller lawfully did not comply with the demand of the officials to present documents confirming the safety and quality of the products (mushrooms) sold, documents for the point of sale and their own documents, is unfounded , since the Law of the Russian Federation of 07.02.92 No. 2300-I “On Protection of Consumer Rights” establishes the rights of consumers to purchase goods (works, services) of good quality and safe for life and health, to receive information about goods (works, services) and about their manufacturers, as well as state and public protection of their interests. According to Art. Article 10 of this Law prohibits the sale of goods without safety certificates.

By virtue of paragraph 1 of Art. 5 of the Federal Law "On the quality and safety of food products" individual entrepreneurs and legal entities engaged in the manufacture and circulation of food products in the retail food products are obliged to provide buyers or consumers, as well as state supervision and control authorities with complete and reliable information about the quality and safety of food products, compliance with the requirements of regulatory documents in the manufacture and circulation of food products. These certificates must be located at the point of sale and presented upon request to both inspection bodies and buyers.

The applicant's argument that, based on the results of the audit, the company was not held administratively liable, was not taken into account by the court, since at the time of the audit, the owner outlet and products sold to the regulatory authority was not known. This fact in itself cannot serve as a basis for recognizing the actions of officials of the administrative body as illegal and does not violate the legitimate rights and interests of the applicant.

Considering the above circumstances, the court refused to meet the requirements of OOO «P». By a decision of the court of appeal, the decision of the court of first instance was upheld (case No. A47-15672/2004 AK-22).

Part 2 of Art. 19.19 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation provides for liability for violation of the rules of mandatory certification by committing various actions (inaction) that form independent offenses.

The named norm is subject to application in all cases, except for those provided for in the articles indicated in its text: 13.6 (use of non-certified means of communication or provision of non-certified communication services), parts 2 and 4 of Art. 13.12 (violation of information protection rules), Part 2 of Art. 14.4 (sale of goods, performance of work, provision of services to the public without a certificate of conformity (declaration of conformity)), Part 2 of Art. 14.16 (delivery or retail alcohol and alcohol-containing products without a certificate of conformity), Art. 20.4 (parts 4 and 5, respectively, provide for the issuance of a certificate of conformity for products without a certificate fire safety, if the latter is mandatory, and the sale of products or the provision of services subject to mandatory certification in the field of fire safety, without a certificate of conformity), art. 20.14 (violation of the rules for certification of weapons and ammunition).

Here are examples from judicial practice concerning the application of Art. 19.19 Administrative Code of the Russian Federation.

Central Interregional Territorial Administration federal agency for technical regulation and metrology, represented by the department of state supervision, applied to the arbitration court with a statement on bringing LLC “E” to administrative responsibility under Part 2 of Art. 19.19 Administrative Code of the Russian Federation.

The Company sold the UZO-01 residual current device, network extension cords Cosmos U-5m-3g, 46-004, U6-766 without certificates of conformity, without specifying information about certification in the accompanying technical documentation. TS-3 Wellcont network tees were sold without a mark of conformity and without indication of certification information in the accompanying technical documentation.

These circumstances were established as a result of examination of the evidence submitted by the parties in support of their claims and objections, including certificates of conformity No. ROSS C No. AYA20. BO6287, No. ROSS C No. AYA46. B66127, No. ROSS RU. ME 04. B00995, No. ROSS RU. ME 04. B06083, No. ROSS RU AYA 46. B18153, as well as the results of the check recorded in the act of 03/28/2005 No. 80, sampling acts of 03/14/2005, protocol technical inspection from 14.03.2005.

The company referred to the existence of valid certificates of conformity for UZO-01 residual current devices, network extension cords Kosmos U-5m-3g, K6-004, U6-766, however, the court did not accept this argument, since the belonging of these certificates to this particular product was not confirmed .

During the consideration of the case, the court found that the administrative body proved the fact of violation by the company of the requirements of clauses 3.8, 4.6 of the Rules for Certification in the Russian Federation, approved by the Decree of the State Standard of Russia dated 10.05.2000 No. 26, clause 2 of Art. 28 of the Federal Law "On technical regulation", paragraphs 2 and 3 of Art. 10 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On Protection of Consumer Rights".

The revealed violations by the legal representative of the company were not denied, their presence was motivated by reference to the failure to fulfill contractual obligations by the supplier.
In view of the foregoing, the court satisfied the requirements of the administrative body and brought the company to administrative responsibility, under Part 2 of Art. 19.19 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, based on the fact that this norm establishes administrative liability for violation of the rules of mandatory certification, with the exception of cases provided for in Art. 13.6, parts 2 and 4 of Art. 13.12, part 2 of Art. 14.4, part 2 of Art. 14.16, art. 20.4, 20.14 of this Code, i.e. for the sale of certified products that do not meet the requirements of regulatory documents for which it is certified, or the sale of certified products without a certificate of conformity (declaration of conformity), or without a mark of conformity, or without indication in the accompanying technical documentation information about certification or regulatory documents that the specified products must comply with, or failure to communicate this information to the consumer (buyer, customer), as well as the presentation of unreliable product test results or the unreasonable issuance of a certificate of conformity (declaration of conformity) for products subject to mandatory certification. By decisions of the appellate and cassation instances, the decision of the court of first instance was left unchanged (decision of April 27, 2005 of the Moscow Arbitration Court; decision of June 17, 2005 N 09AP-5947 / 05-AK of the Ninth Arbitration Court of Appeal in case N A40-16434 / 05 -96-132; Decree of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District dated September 29, 2005 No. KA-A40 / 9144-05).

Federal government agency The Center for Standardization, Metrology and Certification verified compliance with the mandatory requirements of state standards in the implementation by entrepreneur G. of activities for the sale of household enameled utensils from a wholesale warehouse.

Based on the results of the audit, an act of November 14, 2002 and a protocol on an administrative offense were drawn up on bringing businessman G. to administrative responsibility under Parts 1, 2 of Art. 19.19 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation for violation of the mandatory requirements of state standards - clause 5.4.3 of GOST 24788-2001 (sale of household enameled utensils in the absence of a conformity mark on each unit of production). In addition, a violation of the requirements of clause 4.6 of GOST 51121-97 was revealed (lack of information for the consumer about the rules and conditions for safe and effective use products). The materials of the administrative case were sent to the arbitration court.

By the decision of the court of first instance, the requirements of the administrative body were satisfied, the entrepreneur was brought to administrative responsibility under Part 2 of Art. 19.19 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, believing that the entrepreneur has not fulfilled the obligation to conduct production control for the quality and safety of products sold, compliance with the requirements of regulatory and technical documents for the conditions for the sale of such products. The violation was expressed in the sale of products in the absence of a conformity mark, i.e. there is no marking directly for each unit of production, and the sale of dishes without a certificate issued authorized body. By decision of the cassation instance, the decision of the court of first instance was canceled on the following grounds.

Decree of the State Standard of Russia dated 25.07.96 No. 14 “On the Rules for the Application of the Mark of Conformity for Mandatory Certification of Products” (as amended on 05.07.2002) provides that the use of the mark of conformity for its intended purpose is considered to be the labeling of the product itself and (or) its packaging ( containers), accompanying technical documentation received by the consumer during the sale.
Since it is clear from the case materials that the marking was put on the packaging of products, and considering that paragraph 4.3 of the Decree of the State Standard of Russia dated July 25, 1996 No. 14 (dated July 5, 2002) does not contain a direct indication of the labeling of each unit of production, the conclusion about the absence of a matching sign is erroneous.

At the time of checking and drawing up the protocol, the entrepreneur had a certificate of conformity. The certificate was issued to the entrepreneur by the company "Emal" on 07/12/2002 with a validity period of up to 07/01/2005 for compliance with enameled utensils to GOST 24788-81.
In connection with the introduction of the new GOST No. 24788-2001 from 01.09.2002, the manufacturer LLC "Emal" submitted an application to the Magnitogorsk Center for Standardization and Metrology for certification of manufactured products for compliance with the new GOST.

According to paragraph 3.5.3 of the Decree of the State Standard of Russia of September 21, 1994 No. 15 “On Approval of the Procedure for Certifying Products in the Russian Federation” (as amended on July 11, 2002) for products sold by the manufacturer during the validity period of the certificate for mass-produced products, the certificate is valid upon its delivery, sale during the expiration date (service life) established in accordance with the current legislation of the Russian Federation for making claims regarding product deficiencies.
Certificate of conformity of cookware to GOST 24788-2001 valid until 12/25/2005 was obtained by OOO "Emal" on 12/25/2002. Thus, until 12/25/2002 the certificate dated 07/12/2002 was valid and the dishes could be sold. (decision of 14.01.2003 and decision of the appellate instance of 17.03.2003 of the Arbitration Court Sverdlovsk region in case N A60-29071 / 02-C5; Decree of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Urals District dated June 26, 2003 No. F09-1820/03-AK).

The administrative body checked compliance with the rules for certification of goods sold in a retail outlet owned by entrepreneur R.

The audit found that the sale of goods - cell phones was produced in violation of the rules of mandatory certification: there are no certificates of conformity for the "communication" system on 12 new cell phones: "Nokia 6020", "Sharp GX-L15", "Nokia 6230", "Samsung X640", "Samsung SGH-D500", " Samsung X 460", "SoniErricson K700i", "Samsung SGH-E850", "SoniErricson K500i", "Philips 568", "Motorola V620", "LG 1610"; there is no sign of conformity of the "communication" certification system on 7 used cell phones: "Siemens M35", "Siemens M55", "Siemens CT55", "Panasonic EB-GD92", "Samsung G200", "SoniErricson T630", "Motorola" V150".

Based on the results of the check against businessman R., a protocol on an administrative offense was drawn up, on the basis of a protocol for the seizure of things and documents, 19 cell phones were seized.

The administrative body applied to the arbitration court with an application to bring entrepreneur P to administrative responsibility, provided for in Part 2 of Art. 19.19 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, with the confiscation of seized cell phones.

The businessman stated that the sale of telephones by him under commission agreements concluded with Russian citizens, foreign citizens and stateless persons, by virtue of paragraphs 2, 8, 9 of the Rules for commission trade in non-food products, approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated 06.06.98 No. 569, exempts him from the obligation to check the circumstances of the acquisition of phones handed over to the commission.

In accordance with Part 2 of Art. 19.19 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation violation of the rules of mandatory certification, i.e. the sale of certified products that do not meet the requirements of regulatory documents for which they are certified, or the sale of certified products without a certificate of conformity (declaration of conformity) or without a mark of conformity, or without indication in the accompanying technical documentation information about certification or regulatory documents that the specified products must comply with, or failure to communicate this information to the consumer, entails a fine on officials in the amount of 10 to 20 minimum wages with confiscation of the objects of an administrative offense.

The certification procedure is determined by the Federal Law of December 27, 2002 No. 184-FZ “On Technical Regulation”. According to Art. 2 of this Law, certification of products is a form of confirmation of compliance of objects with the requirements of technical regulations, the provisions of standards or the terms of contracts carried out by the certification body. Through certification, a legal entity or an individual entrepreneur accredited in the prescribed manner for its implementation certifies in writing that the products comply with technical regulations, provisions of standards or terms of contracts.

Article 18 of the mentioned Law determines that certification (conformity assessment) is carried out in order to: certify the conformity of products, production processes, operation, storage, transportation, sale and disposal of works, services or other objects with technical regulations, standards, terms of contracts; assistance to purchasers in the competent choice of products, works, services; increasing the competitiveness of products, works, services in the Russian and international markets and creating conditions for ensuring the free movement of goods across the territory of the Russian Federation, as well as for the implementation of international economic, scientific and technical cooperation and international trade.

As follows from Art. 46 of Law No. 184-FZ, before the entry into force of the relevant technical regulations, the requirements for the process of selling products established by regulatory legal acts RF and regulatory documents of federal executive authorities are subject to mandatory execution.

In addition, Art. 41 of the Federal Law of July 7, 2003 No. 126-FZ "On Communications" stipulates that confirmation of compliance established requirements means of communication used in a communication network common use, is mandatory. Confirmation of compliance of communication facilities with technical regulations is carried out through their mandatory certification. Communication facilities subject to mandatory certification are provided for certification by the manufacturer or seller. The list of communications subject to mandatory certification includes, among other things, radio-electronic communications.

In accordance with special conditions purchases of radio-electronic means and high-frequency devices, approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of July 17, 1996 No. 832, subscriber wearable (portable) radio stations cellular networks radio communications of federal and regional standards are classified as radio electronic means.
The rules for certification in the Russian Federation, approved by the Decree of the State Standard of Russia dated 10.05.2000 No. 26, provide that manufacturers (sellers, performers) of products, when conducting mandatory certification, among other things, mark certified products with a conformity mark, indicate information about the certificate in the accompanying technical documentation (clause 3.8). A certificate is issued for products for which, according to the results of certification, compliance with the requirements of regulatory documents is confirmed. The conformity mark is applied to the products (tare, packaging), accompanying technical documentation received by the consumer during the sale (clause 4.6).

In the order of paragraph 2 of Art. 25 of the Federal Law "On Technical Regulation", the conformity of products with the requirements of technical regulations is confirmed by a certificate of conformity issued to the applicant by the certification body. According to paragraph 2 of Art. 28 of this Law, the applicant is obliged to present to the bodies of state control (supervision) over compliance with the requirements of technical regulations, as well as to interested parties, documents confirming the conformity of products with the requirements of technical regulations (declaration of conformity, certificate of conformity or copies thereof).
Thus, the implementation by an entrepreneur of the sale of cell phones without conformity marks on the phones themselves and without certificates of conformity forms an administrative offense, responsibility for which is provided for in Part 2 of Art. 19.19 Administrative Code of the Russian Federation.

The entrepreneur's reference to the Rules for Commission Trade in Non-Food Products was not taken into account by the court, since liability under Part 2 of Art. 19.19 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation comes for the sale of products without a mark of conformity and certificates of conformity.

Considering the above, the court satisfied the requirements of the administrative body: businessman R. was brought to administrative responsibility on the basis of Part 2 of Art. 19.19 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation in the form of a fine of 1000 rubles. with confiscation of subjects of an administrative offense - confiscated cell phones. By the decisions of the appellate and cassation instances, the decision of the court was upheld (the decision of 06/27/2005 and the decision of the appellate instance of 09/07/2005 of the Arbitration Court of the Pskov Region in case N A52-2720/2005/2; case No. А52-2720/2005/2).

The Federal State Institution "Volgograd Center for Standardization, Metrology and Certification" conducted an inspection of the organization, these inspections were recorded in the inspection protocol. During the check, it was found that the marking on the label does not contain sufficient information about the sausages "Ural" and sausages "Taiga": the content of phosphate is not indicated. Sausages "Taiga" also do not meet the conditions of TU9213-043-13160604-99 in terms of the presence of large inclusions of the bone residue.
The label for smoked-boiled chicken legs does not contain the necessary and sufficient information about the product: the expiration date of the product is not indicated, the product does not contain salt, sodium nitrite, phosphate.

The label for homemade bacon contains false information about the energy value of the product: it is indicated that 100 g of the product contains 18% protein (instead of 4%), fat - 5% (instead of 96%); there is no information about the product: salt, spices, as well as the expiration date of the product are not indicated.

As a result external examination, physico-chemical and microbiological analyzes, these checks were confirmed. In sausages "Ural" bacteria of the group of Escherichia coli were found in 1 g of the product. The product does not correspond to the reported information on the energy value of the product.

The protocol on an administrative offense found the organization to have violated Art. 3 of the Federal Law "On the quality and safety of food products"; mandatory requirements of GOST R51074-97, p. 3 item 4.2; Art. 13 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On certification of products and services". Responsibility for such violations is provided for in Parts 1 and 2 of Art. 19.19 Administrative Code of the Russian Federation.
The administrative body filed an application to bring the organization to administrative responsibility to the arbitration court. The court satisfied the requirements of the administrative body and brought the organization to administrative responsibility. By decisions of the appellate and cassation instances, the decision of the court was left unchanged (decision of September 9, 2002; Resolution of the appellate instance of October 17, 2002 in case N A 12-7938 / 02-C43 of the Arbitration Court of the Volgograd Region; decision of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Volga District of 14.01 .2003 in case No. A12-7938/02-C43).
The foregoing cannot testify to the effectiveness of these measures of administrative responsibility for violation of the mandatory requirements of state standards in the absence of statistical data. However, the low level of quality of many types of products is now a well-known fact. Therefore, the improvement of legislation in the area under consideration, bringing it into line with the new market stage in the development of the economy remains relevant.

Valentina Mikhailovna SHTYRNIK , Assistant Judge of the Arbitration Court of the Orenburg Region

Responsibility of manufacturers, certification bodies, testing laboratories (centers) and their officials for violation of mandatory requirements for products (goods) is established Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses, the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and other legislative acts. The Federal Law "On Technical Regulation", enacted on July 1, 2003, provided for a number of elements of offenses for which the said bodies and officials should be held liable in accordance with the said legislative acts.
So, in Art. 36 of the Federal Law "On Technical Regulation" (hereinafter - the Federal Law) establishes the responsibility of the manufacturer (executor, seller, person performing the functions of a foreign manufacturer) for violation and, in particular, for the following offenses: "if, as a result of non-compliance of products with the requirements of technical regulations, violations of the requirements of technical regulations during production, operation, storage, transportation, sale and disposal, harm has been caused to the life or health of citizens, property of individuals or legal entities, state or municipal property, the environment, the life or health of animals and plants, the manufacturer (performer, seller, person performing the functions of a foreign manufacturer) is obliged to compensate for the harm caused in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation.
The Federal Law also establishes offenses for the commission of which, in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation and the contract, liability of certification bodies and their officials is provided for in case of non-compliance with the rules for performing certification work, if this entailed the release into circulation of products that do not comply requirements of technical regulations, and accredited testing laboratories (centers), experts for the unreliability or bias of the presented results of research (tests) and measurements (Art. 41, 42).
Thus, the responsibility of manufacturers, certification bodies, testing laboratories (centers) and their officials for offenses under Art. 36, 41, 42, Federal law associates with violations requirements of technical regulations and the onset of these violations of the consequences. In addition, the Federal Law provides for new offenses for which the current legislation does not contain specific legal measures.
These circumstances are an obstacle to the application of the Federal Law in full, since technical regulations have not yet been adopted (according to paragraph 7 of Article 46 they must be adopted within 7 years from the date of entry into force of the Federal Law) and the necessary changes and additions have not been made to the relevant legislative acts. For example, the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation provides for administrative liability for violations, and not for violations requirements of technical regulations as stated in federal law.
New provisions introduced into the Federal Law, for example, on compensation by the manufacturer for damage caused life or health of animals and plants due to violations of the requirements of technical regulations (Article 36), on the responsibility of certification bodies and their officials for violation of the rules for certification, if they entailed the release into circulation of products that do not meet the requirements of technical regulations (Article 41), or liability experts(Article 42) have not yet been included in the relevant legislative acts providing for specific measures of legal influence, and, therefore, the Federal Law does not work in this part.
Until the necessary changes and additions are made to the legislative acts providing for punishment, and the adoption of technical regulations in the transition period established by Art. 46 of the Federal Law, manufacturers, mandatory certification bodies, testing laboratories (centers) and their officials must be held liable for violations mandatory requirements of state standards in accordance with the current civil, administrative and criminal legislation of the Russian Federation.

Civil Liability

The civil liability of the manufacturer, seller, performer is provided for by the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), the Law of the Russian Federation "On the Protection of Consumer Rights" (hereinafter referred to as the Law) and other legislative acts of the Russian Federation and is expressed in the application by the court to the offender in the interests of victim of measures established by civil law or contract. As a rule, these measures are of a property nature - compensation for harm, losses, payment of penalties, penalties, fines.
Along with general issues of compensation for harm, Section 3 of Chapter 59 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation specifically provides for compensation for damage caused due to defects in goods, work, services.
So, in part 1 of Art. 1095 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation establishes: "Harm caused to life, health or property of a citizen or property of a legal entity due to constructive, prescription or other shortcomings of the product, work or service, as well as due to inaccurate or insufficient information about the product (work, service), is subject to compensation by the seller or the manufacturer of the goods, the person who performed the work or provided the service (performer), regardless of their fault and regardless of whether the victim was in a contractual relationship with him or not.
This legal rule found further development in paragraph 1 of Art. 14 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On Protection of Consumer Rights", according to which harm caused to the life, health or property of the consumer due to design, production, prescription or other defects in the goods (work, service) is subject to compensation in full.
Harm to the life, health or property of the consumer can be caused, for example, by goods released by the manufacturer into circulation on the market in violation of the mandatory requirements of state standards, the rules for mandatory certification provided for in parts 1 and 2 of Art. 19.19 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation (see section 2).
Art. 1096 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation specifies the persons responsible for the harm caused due to defects in goods, work, services. If in Art. 1095 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation provides that the damage is subject to compensation by the seller or manufacturer of the goods, then in Art. 1096 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation states that the specified damage is compensated by the seller or manufacturer at the choice of the victim, i.e. the victim has the right to bring a claim for compensation for harm to him at his own discretion against the seller or manufacturer.
As can be seen from the above provisions, the responsibility of the manufacturer, seller, performer occurs in the presence of a shortage in the product, in the work performed, the service rendered and the harm caused by this.
Lack of goods (work, services) as one of the grounds for liability may be of a production, design, prescription or other nature, which is the result of a violation by the manufacturer, seller, performer of the requirements for the quality and safety of goods (work, services), or in the provision of incomplete or inaccurate information about them.
The obligation of the seller (executor) to transfer to the buyer goods (perform work, provide a service) of proper quality, necessary and reliable information about the product, work, service is established by Art. 469, 495 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, Art. 4:10 Law.
Harm, as the second important basis of liability, is damage, caused to the personality of a citizen due to loss of health or injury, or death of the breadwinner, as well as damage caused to the property of a citizen or legal entity due to its damage, destruction, damage, etc.
It should be borne in mind that liability under Art. 1095 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation is coming, if the harm is in a causal relationship with the shortcomings goods (works, services), i.e. is a consequence of a violation of the requirements for the quality and safety of a product, work, service or insufficient, inaccurate information about them.
Unlike general rule established by Art. 1064 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, according to which the person who caused harm is exempted from compensation for harm if he proves that the harm was caused through no fault of his, Art. 1095 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation provides for the liability of the manufacturer, seller or performer, regardless of fault, i.e. both in the presence of guilt and in its absence.
The right to demand compensation for harm is recognized for any consumer, regardless of whether he was in a contractual relationship with the seller (performer) or not (clause 2, article 14 of the Law). Therefore, not only the buyer of the goods, but also another person can claim compensation for damage. For example, not only the buyer, but also relatives and neighbors were harmed from the fire of a TV set, and, therefore, the buyer himself, his relatives, neighbors and other persons who suffered damage have the right to demand compensation for damage.
It should be noted that according to Part 2 of Art. 1095 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the rules provided for in part 1 of this article apply only in cases of the acquisition of goods (performance of work or provision of services) for consumer purposes, and not for use in business activities. The action of the specified article on compensation for damage caused to property also applies to legal entities only if they used the goods (results of work, services) not for business purposes, but, for example, for the purposes of cultural, community and other services for employees of a legal entity .
Compensation for damage caused in connection with entrepreneurial activity is carried out on common grounds established by Sections 1 and 2 of Chapter 59 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.
Damage caused to the life, health or property of the consumer is subject to compensation if it is caused within the established service life, shelf life of goods (work).
According to paragraph 2 of Art. 5 of the Law, the manufacturer (executor) is obliged to establish the service life of the goods (work), which, after a certain period, may pose a danger to the life, health of the consumer, harm his property or the environment.
Best before date is installed on food, medicines, perfumes and cosmetics, products household chemicals and other goods that are completely consumed in the process of use, and life time installed on goods intended for durable use ( washing machines, televisions, refrigerators, etc.), including components (parts, assemblies, assemblies, etc.).
If the manufacturer (executor) has not established a service life for the goods (work), the damage is subject to compensation in case of its infliction. within ten years from the date of transfer of the goods (work) to the consumer, and if the date of transfer cannot be determined - from the date of manufacture of the goods (completion of the work performed) (clause 3, article 14 of the Law).
Sale of goods(completing of the work) after the expiration date, as well as goods (performance of work), for which an expiration date should be set, but not set, prohibited(Clause 5, Article 5 of the Law).
It is also determined that if a product (results of work) should have a service life or shelf life, but it has not been established, or the consumer has not been provided with complete and reliable information about the service life or shelf life, if the consumer has not been informed of the necessary actions to expiration of the service life or expiration date and possible consequences if the specified actions are not performed, or the product (the result of work) after the expiration of these periods poses a danger to life and health, the damage is subject to compensation regardless of the time of its infliction (clause 3, article 14 of the Law, art. 1097 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).
The civil legislation of the Russian Federation also protects the interests of the manufacturer, seller, performer. According to Art. 1098 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and paragraph 5 of Art. 14 of the Law, the seller or manufacturer of goods, performer of work or service is exempted from liability if he proves that the damage was caused by force majeure or violation by the consumer established rules use of goods, results of work, services or their storage.
Force majeure refers to an event that is extraordinary and unavoidable under given conditions (natural disaster: for example, flood, earthquake, etc.) (Legal encyclopedic Dictionary, Moscow, 1996).
The law establishes judicial protection of consumer rights. It is provided that the protection of consumer rights is carried out by the court. Claims are filed in court at the place of residence of the plaintiff or at the location of the defendant, or at the place of infliction of harm.
Consumers on claims related to violation of their rights, as well as the federal antimonopoly body, federal executive authorities (their territorial bodies) that control the quality and safety of goods (works, services), bodies local government, public associations of consumers (their associations, unions) on claims brought in the interests of a consumer, a group of consumers, an indefinite circle of consumers, are exempt from paying state fees (Article 17 of the Law).
It should be borne in mind that the participants in relations regulated by civil law are citizens and legal entities (Article 2 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). General provisions on the contract (the procedure for concluding and terminating it) are provided for by Chapters 27-29 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

Administrative responsibility

Administrative responsibility is established by the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses (hereinafter referred to as the Code of Administrative Offenses). The Code of Administrative Offenses regulates relations in the field of protecting the health and safety of citizens, environment, sanitary and epidemiological welfare of the population, protection of state, public security, morality and establishes the responsibility of citizens, officials, individual entrepreneurs, legal entities for administrative offenses committed in various fields activities, branches of economy and management.
A measure of responsibility - an administrative penalty established by a specific article of the Code of Administrative Offenses, may be applied by an official of the body authorized to consider cases of administrative offenses, on the basis of a protocol on an administrative offense drawn up by an authorized official.
The right to draw up protocols on administrative offenses under Art. 19.19, part 1 of Art. 19.4, part 1 of Art. 19.5, art. 19.6, 19.7, 17.7, 17.9, part 2, 3 art. 14.1, Art. 19.20 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, part 1, part 2, paragraph 66 and part 3 of Art. 28.3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses to authorized officials of the State Standard of Russia, the assignee of which is the Federal Agency for Technical Regulation and Metrology (hereinafter referred to as the Agency). According to paragraph 6 of the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of June 17, 2004 294, the said Agency licenses activities for the manufacture and repair of measuring instruments, functions for state, metrological control and supervision until changes are made to legislative acts and exercises control and supervision over compliance with the mandatory requirements of state standards and technical regulations until the Government of the Russian Federation makes a decision to transfer these functions to other federal executive bodies. The procedure for drawing up a protocol on an administrative offense is set out in Art. 28.2 of the Code of Administrative Offenses.
Order of the State Standard of Russia dated September 26, 2002 213 (registered with the Ministry of Justice of Russia on October 7, 2002, registration 3836) in accordance with Part 4 of Art. 28.3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses approved the list of officials of the Gosstandart of Russia authorized to draw up protocols on administrative offenses ("Rossiyskaya Gazeta" dated October 16, 2002 196).
Administrative responsibility of officials and legal entities for violation of the mandatory requirements of state standards, rules for mandatory certification, requirements of regulatory documents to ensure the uniformity of measurements provided for by Art. 19.19 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, which contains three parts.
Part 1 Art. 19.19 of the Code of Administrative Offenses establishes administrative liability for violation of the mandatory requirements of state standards in the implementation (supply, sale), use (operation), storage, transportation or disposal of products, as well as for evading the presentation of products, documents or information necessary for state control and supervision . For the listed offenses, an administrative fine is imposed on officials in the amount of five to ten; for legal entities - fifty to one hundred the minimum wage with confiscation of objects of an administrative offense.
Administrative liability for violation of the mandatory requirements of state standards is also provided for in Art. 6.14, 8.23, 9.4, part 1 of Art. 12.2, part 2 of Art. 13.4, Art. 13.8, part 1 of Art. 14.4, Art. 20.4 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, however, officials of the State Standard of Russia (the Agency) are not given the right to draw up protocols on administrative offenses provided for by these articles. According to these offenses, officials of other departments have the right to draw up protocols, and therefore, from the offenses of Part 1 of Art. 19.19 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, the listed articles are excluded.
Part 2 Art. 19.19 of the Code of Administrative Offenses establishes administrative liability for violation of the rules of mandatory certification, i.e. for the sale of certified products that do not meet the requirements of regulatory documents for which it is certified, or for the sale of certified products without a certificate of conformity (declaration of conformity), or without a mark of conformity, or without indicating in the accompanying technical documentation information about certification or regulatory documents with which the specified products must comply, or for not communicating this information to the consumer (buyer, customer), as well as for providing unreliable product test results or for unjustified issuance of a certificate of conformity (declaration of conformity) for products subject to mandatory certification.
For these offenses, an administrative fine is imposed on officials in the amount of ten to twenty the minimum wage with confiscation of objects of an administrative offense; for legal entities - two hundred to three hundred the minimum wage with confiscation of objects of an administrative offense.
Administrative liability for violation of the rules of mandatory certification is also provided for in Art. 13.6, parts 2 and 4 of Art. 13.12, part 2 of Art. 14.4, part 2 of Art. 14.16, art. 20.4, 20.14 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, however, officials of the Gosstandart of Russia (the Agency) are not given the right to draw up protocols on these administrative offenses, officials of other departments are entitled to draw them up, and therefore these offenses from Part 2 of Art. 19.19 of the Code of Administrative Offenses are excluded.
Authorized officials of the State Standard of Russia (Agency) drawn up protocols on administrative offenses under Parts 2 and 3 of Art. 14.1, parts 1 and 2 of Art. 19.19 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, should send: in relation to citizens and officials, in accordance with Part 1 of Art. 23.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, the relevant magistrate, and in relation to legal entities or individual entrepreneurs, in accordance with Part 3 of Art. 23.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, - to the appropriate judge of the arbitration court to consider cases of administrative offenses.
It must be borne in mind that in this case, legal entities include manufacturers and sellers of products, performers of work, services, which may also be individual entrepreneurs.
The subject of an administrative offense may be, for example, certified products that do not meet the requirements of regulatory documents for which they are certified.
Part 3 Art. 19.19 of the Code of Administrative Offenses establishes administrative liability for violation of the rules for verifying measuring instruments, the requirements of certified measurement methods, the requirements for the state of standards of established units of quantities or metrological rules and norms in trade, as well as for the production, sale, rental or use of measuring instruments, the types of which are not approved , or for the use of unverified measuring instruments.
For the commission of these offenses, an administrative fine is imposed on officials in the amount of five to tenfifty to one hundred
Art. 23.52 of the Code of Administrative Offenses to consider cases of administrative offenses under Part 3 of Art. 19.19 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, on behalf of the State Standard of Russia (the Agency), the right was granted to the chief state inspector of the Russian Federation for supervision of state standards and ensuring the uniformity of measurements, his deputies, the chief state inspectors of subjects (regions) of the Russian Federation for supervision of state standards and ensuring the uniformity of measurements and their deputies. To consider a case on an administrative offense, authorized officials of the Gosstandart of Russia (Agency) must send the completed protocols on these offenses to the relevant chief state inspector for supervision of state standards and ensuring the uniformity of measurements (his deputy), the chief state inspector of the subject (region) of the Russian Federation for supervision for state standards and ensuring the uniformity of measurements (to his deputy).
As already mentioned, parts 1, 2, paragraph 66 of Art. 28.3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, authorized officials of the Gosstandart of Russia (the Agency) are also granted the right to draw up protocols on administrative offenses under Part 1 of Art. 19.4, part 1 of Art. 19.5, art. 19.6, 19.7 of the Code of Administrative Offenses.
Administrative responsibility, under Part. 1 Article. 19.4 and part 1 of Art. 19.5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, is aimed at ensuring the functioning and increasing the role of state supervision (control), including state control (supervision) over compliance with the mandatory requirements of state standards, mandatory certification rules, and requirements of regulatory documents to ensure the uniformity of measurements.
So, part 1 of Art. 19.4 of the Code of Administrative Offenses establishes administrative responsibility for disobedience to a lawful order or requirement of an official of a body exercising state supervision (control), as well as obstruction of the implementation by this official official duties which entails a warning or the imposition of an administrative fine on citizens in the amount of five to tenten to twenty minimum wages.
Part 1 Art. 19.5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses provides for administrative liability for failure to comply within the prescribed period with a legal order (decree, presentation) of the body (official) exercising state supervision (control) to eliminate violations of the law, which entails the imposition of an administrative fine on citizens in the amount of three to five minimum wages; on officials - five to ten minimum wages; for legal entities - fifty to one hundred minimum wages.
Administrative liability under Art. 19.6 and 19.7 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, is aimed at strengthening the role of officials who are granted the right to consider cases of administrative offenses, and at increasing the authority of their decisions on the case.
Yes, Art. 19.6 of the Code of Administrative Offenses establishes administrative responsibility for failure to take measures to eliminate the causes and conditions that contributed to the commission of an administrative offense, which entails the imposition of an administrative fine on officials in the amount of three to five minimum wages.
Art. 19.7 of the Code of Administrative Offenses establishes administrative liability for failure to submit or late submission of government agency(official) data (information) that are provided for by law and necessary for the implementation of this body (official) of its legal activities, as well as the submission to the state body (official) of such data (information) in incomplete or distorted form, for except for the cases provided for in Art. 19.8, 19.19 of the Code of Administrative Offenses (these articles already provide for liability for violating the order of information), which entails the imposition of an administrative fine on citizens in the amount of one to three minimum wages; on officials - three to five minimum wages; for legal entities - thirty to fifty minimum wages.
In addition, according to part 3 of Art. 28.3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, authorized officials of the Gosstandart of Russia (Agency) have the right to draw up protocols on administrative offenses under Parts 2 and 3 of Art. 14.1 and art. 19.20 of the Code of Administrative Offenses on liability for non-compliance with the terms of a license, including those issued by the Agency for the implementation of activities for the manufacture and repair of measuring instruments, as well as Art. 17.7 and 17.9 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, whose responsibility is aimed at the unconditional fulfillment of the requirements of officials conducting proceedings in cases of administrative offenses, and at preventing obstruction of the establishment of the truth in these cases.
So, part 2 of Art. 14.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses provides for liability for carrying out entrepreneurial activities without a special permit (license), if such a permit (such license) is mandatory (mandatory), which entails the imposition of an administrative fine on citizens in the amount of twenty to twenty five the minimum wage with confiscation manufactured products, tools of production and raw materials or without it; on officials - forty to fifty the minimum wage with confiscation manufactured products, tools of production and raw materials or without it; for legal entities - four hundred to five hundred the minimum wage with confiscation manufactured products, instruments of production and raw materials or without them.
Part 3 Art. 14.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses provides for liability for carrying out entrepreneurial activities in violation of the conditions provided for by a special permit (license), which entails the imposition of an administrative fine on citizens in the amount of fifteen to twenty minimum wages; on officials - thirty to forty minimum wages; for legal entities - three hundred to four hundred minimum wages.
Part 1 Art. 19.20 of the Code of Administrative Offenses provides for liability for carrying out activities not related to making a profit without a special permit (license), if such a permit (such a license) is mandatory (obligatory), which entails the imposition of an administrative fine on citizens in the amount of five to ten minimum wages; on officials - ten to twenty minimum wages; for legal entities - one hundred to two hundred minimum wages.
Part 2 Art. 19.20 of the Code of Administrative Offenses provides for liability for carrying out activities not related to making a profit, in violation of the requirements or conditions of a special permit (license), if such a permit (such a license) is mandatory (obligatory), which entails the imposition of an administrative fine on citizens in the amount of three to five minimum wages; on officials - five to ten minimum wages; for legal entities - fifty to one hundred minimum wages.
Art. 17.7 of the Code of Administrative Offenses establishes administrative liability for deliberate failure to comply with the legal requirements of an official conducting proceedings in a case of an administrative offense, which entails the imposition of a fine on citizens in the amount of ten to fifteen minimum wages; on officials - twenty to thirty minimum wages.
Art. 17.9 of the Code of Administrative Offenses provides for administrative liability for knowingly false testimony of a witness, an explanation of a specialist, an expert opinion or a knowingly incorrect translation in the proceedings on an administrative offense, which entails the imposition of an administrative fine in the amount of ten to fifteen minimum wages.
Authorized officials of the Gosstandart of Russia, now the state control (supervision) bodies of the Federal Agency for Technical Regulation and Metrology (see clause 6 of the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of June 17, 2004 294) protocols on administrative offenses under Part 1 of Art. 19.4, part 1 of Art. 19.5, art. 19.6, 19.7, 19.20, 17.7 and 17.9 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, in accordance with Part 1 of Art. 23.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, must be sent to the appropriate magistrate for consideration of the case of an administrative offense.

Criminal liability

For violation by citizens and officials security requirements established criminal liability Art. 238 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter - the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), which contains 3 parts of the following content:
"1. Manufacture, storage or transportation for the purpose of sale or sale of goods and products, performance of work or provision of services that do not meet the requirements of the safety of life or health of consumers, as well as the illegal issuance or use of an official document certifying the compliance of these goods, works or services with the requirements security, is punishable by a fine in the amount up to 300 thousand roubles, or in the amount of the wage or salary, or any other income of the convicted person for a period up to two years, or by restraint of liberty for a term of up to two years, or by deprivation of liberty for a term of up to two years.
2. The same acts, if they:
a) committed by a group of persons by prior agreement or by an organized group;
b) committed in relation to goods, works or services intended for children under the age of six;
c) caused by negligence the infliction of grievous bodily harm or the death of a person, is punishable by a fine in the amount of from one hundred thousand to five hundred thousand rubles or in the amount of the wage or other income of the convicted person for a period of one to three years, or by restriction of liberty for a term of up to three years, or by deprivation of liberty for a term of up to six years with a fine in the amount of up to five hundred thousand rubles, or in the amount of wages or other the income of the convict for a period of up to three years or without it.