Challenges of Compulsory Seizure of Private Property by the State through Requisition, Confiscation and Nationalization under the Civil Legislation of Russia
https://doi.org/10.17803/1729-5920.2020.159.2.025-032
Abstract
The existence of extraordinary circumstances, which should be understood as circumstances unavoidable under these conditions, constitutes the condition for requisition. The Civil Code of the Russian Federation gives state bodies a certain freedom in carrying out requisitions, as it is hardly possible to list all exceptional circumstances when additional equipment or other property will be required both to prevent the development of emergencies and to deal with their consequences.
Civil law confiscation involves the termination of private property and the emergence of state ownership of confiscated property. Therefore, it is impossible to treat as confiscation the seizure of tengible media according to Para. 4 of Art. 1252 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, because they were produced in violation of the law and, therefore, ownership has not arisen. The paper also substantiates the conclusion that nationalization requires relevant property to come not into the property of the State, but into the national property. In the author’s opinion, the currently existing State property does not contain any hints of national property, and it can be stated that the Russian people even more than previously are removed from the property of the State and are excluded from State responsibility. Nationwide property serves as a foundation of the civil society.
About the Author
E. V. BogdanovRussian Federation
Evgeniy V. Bogdanov, Dr. Sci. (Law), Professor, Professor of the Department of Civil Law Disciplines
References
1. Bogdanov EV. Dogovory v sfere predprinimatelstva : monografiya [Contracts in the field of entrepreneurship: A monograph]. Moscow: Prospekt Publishing; 2018. (In Russ.)
2. Gavrilov EP, Eremenko VI. Kommentariy k chasti chetvertoy Grazhdanskogo kodeksa Rossiyskoy Federatsii (postateynyy) [Commentary to Part Four of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (annotated)]. Moscow; 2009. (In Russ.)
3. Dorofeeva YuA. Natsionalizatsiya: aspekt mezhdunarodnogo chastnogo prava [Nationalization: An aspect of private international law]. Samara: Samara State Economic Academy Publishing; 2000. (In Russ.)
4. Abova TE, Kabalkin AYu, editors. Kommentariy k Grazhdanskomu kodeksu Rossiyskoy Federatsii, chasti pervoy : v 3 t. [Commentary to the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, Part One: in 3 vol]. 3rd ed. Moscow; 2006. (In Russ.)
5. Tolstoy YK, Yakovlev VF, editors. Pravo sobstvennosti v SSSR (problemy, diskussii, predlozheniya) [Ownership in the USSR (Problems, discussions, proposals)]. Moscow: Yurid. lit. Publishing; 1989. (In Russ.)
6. Raykher VK. Konfiskatsionnye posledstviya sdelok, protivnykh interesam sotsialisticheskogo gosudarstva i obshchestva [Confiscation consequences of transactions contradicting the interests of the socialist state and society]. Pravovedenie [Jurisprudence]. 1965;1. (In Russ.)
7. Yakovlev VF, Makovskiy AL. O chetvertoy chasti Grazhdanskogo kodeksa Rossii [On the fourth part of the Civil Code of Russia]. 2nd book, vol. 2. Selected works. Civil law: History and modernity. Moscow; 2012.
8. Grishin VI, Kurbanov RA, editors. Ekonomiko-pravovye kontseptsii natsionalizatsii: Rossiya i zarubezhnyy opyt : monografiya [Economic and legal concepts of nationalization: Russia and foreign experience: a monograph]. Moscow: Prospekt Publishing; 2019. (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Bogdanov E.V. Challenges of Compulsory Seizure of Private Property by the State through Requisition, Confiscation and Nationalization under the Civil Legislation of Russia. Lex Russica. 2020;73(2):25-32. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17803/1729-5920.2020.159.2.025-032