Damages in Russian Law and in Case Law

As a result of the law of obligations reform a new concept of indemnity (indemnity) "Liability for the breach of obligations", long known in Anglo-Saxon law, was introduced into Ch. 25 Art. 406.1 of the RF Civil Code. The article describes the essence of the indemnity primarily by the example of the classic English case law. This contractual concept is compared with the model indemnity enshrined in Art. 406.1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Comparative legal analysis provided an opportunity for the author to identify a number of significant differences in setting regulations on indemnity under Russian and English law, as well as to make certain conclusions, which according to the author, are of fundamental importance in the assessment of the concept in question. Firstly, the different interpretations of this complex and alien to our legal system phenomenon clearly indicates that the institute of indemnity, developed in the jurisprudence of the case law and based on terminology alien to our legal conceptual apparatus, can not be adopted by the Russian Civil Law. Secondly, introducing provisions on compensation for losses into the Civil Code, in fact we apply a new approach to certain fundamental positions and to the foundations of our civil law. The Russian law of obligations has traditionally been based on separation and attachment of such concepts as "liability" and "risk". Art. 406.1 of the Civil Code adopts an institute, where one party to the contract, despite the proper fulfillment of the obligations, shall be liable for those effects that are not related to its non-breaching activities. Obviously, there has appeared a concept similar to the concept of insurance. Thirdly, it should be borne in mind that litigation in case-law countries has introduced new rules gradually, including regulations on indemnity for settlement of the relations in the civil circulation. Over many years of trial and error the relatively perfect mechanism of loss compensation, which provides for the parties to maintain the balance of interests, has been developed. The introduction of similar rules in the law involves serious preparatory work, especially "docking" new norms with other rules of law, which, in relation to the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, has not been done by our legislators.

compensation for loss, indemnity, contract, damages, liability, the impossibility of performance of an obligation, the breach of an obligation, the proper response to, events, English law, case law, the agreement, the creditor, the debtor

1. York K. H., Bauman J. A., Rendleman D. Remedies, Cases and Materials. 5th ed. St. Paul: West Publishing Co., 1991. P. 321;

2. Daniels M. Substantive and Procedural Aspects of Indemnity Practice: A Practical View for California Lawyers // Stanford Law Review. 1974. Vol. 26. № 3. P. 577-584.

3. Macattram G. How Can the Indemnity Clause Expand or Limit the Responsibility for Liability of the Parties in International Oil and Gas Contracts? // URL: http://www. dundee.ac.uk/cepmlp/car/html/CAR10_ARTICLE2. PDF (дата обращения: 25 января 2017 г.).

4. Treitel G. H. The Law of Contract. 10th ed. L., 1999. P. 864.

5. Courtney W. Contractual Indemnities. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2014.

6. Архипова А. Г. Возмещение потерь в новом ГК РФ: за или против? // Вестник гражданского права. 2012. № 4. С. 158-183.

7. Оробинский В.В. Английское договорное право: просто о сложном. Ростов н/Д, 2016. С. 286-292

8. Витрянский В.В. Реформа российского гражданского законодательства: промежуточные итоги. М., 2016. С. 20

9. Оробинский В.В. Указ. соч. С. 281-287.

10. Оробинский В.В. Указ. соч. С. 286.

11. URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKPC/1935/1.html (дата обращения: 25 января 2017 г.).

12. URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1942/4.html (дата обращения: 25 января 2017 г.).

13. URL: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo6/6-7/40/contents (дата обращения: 25 января 2017 г.).

14. Оробинский В.В. Указ. соч. С. 346, 353.

15. Hodges S. Law of Marine Insurance. L.: Cavendish Publishing Limited, 2006. P. 1.

16. Dawson Unjust enrichment, 1951. Р. 92 -109. Приводится по: Palmer G. E. Book review // Santa Clara Law Review. 1979. Vol. 19. P. 1142.

17. Palmer G. E. Op. cit. P. 1143.

18. ДжанаеваА. М. Эволюция представлений о реституционных правоотношениях в англо-американском праве // Вестник Федерального Арбитражного суда Московского округа. 2013. № 1. С. 111-126.

19. Маковский А.Л. Об уроках реформирования Гражданского кодекса России // Вестник гражданского права. 2013. № 5. С. 162.

20. Архипова А.Г. Возмещение потерь в новом ГК РФ: за или против? // Вестник гражданского права. - 2012. - № 4.

21. Белых В.С. Договорное право Англии: Сравнительно-правовое исследование. - М., 2016.

22. Витрянский В.В. Реформа российского гражданского законодательства: промежуточные итоги. - М., 2016.

23. Джанаева А.М. Эволюция представлений о реституционных правоотношениях в англо-американском праве // Вестник Федерального Арбитражного суда Московского округа. - 2013. - № 1.

24. Маковский А.Л. Об уроках реформирования Гражданского кодекса России // Вестник гражданского права. - 2013. - № 5.

25. Оробинский В.В. Английское договорное право: просто о сложном. - Ростов н/Д: Феникс, 2016.

26. Courtney W. Contractual Indemnities. - Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2014.

27. Daniels M. Substantive and Procedural Aspects of Indemnity Practice: A PracticalView for California Lawyers // Stanford Law Review. - 1974. - Vol. 26. - № 3.

28. Hodges S. Law of Marine Insurance. - L.: Cavendish Publishing Limited, 2006.

29. Palmer G.E. Book review // Santa Clara Law Review. - 1979. - Vol. 19.

30. Treitel G.H. The Law of Contract. 10th ed. - L., 1999.

31. York K.H., Bauman J.A., Rendleman D. Remedies, Cases and Materials. 5th ed. - St. Paul: West Publishing Co., 1991.

32. California Civil Jury Instructions. 3801. Implied Contractual Indemnity URL: http://www.justia. com/trials-litigation/docs/caci/3800/3801.html (дата обращения: 25 января 2017 г.)