Forfeiture of Property to the State as a Special Form of Liability: Application to Special Subjects

The paper examines the legal nature of such a method of termination of ownership as the conversion of property into state revenue in the event of failure to provide evidence that it was acquired with lawful income, as established in subparagraph 8 of paragraph 2 of Article 235 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The author draws attention to the differing classifications of this method of termination of ownership as either a measure of civil-law or public-law liability, and provides a legal characterization of this institution. Taking into account the analysis of positions existing in academic doctrine, as well as the emerging judicial practice, the author concludes that the conversion of property into state revenue constitutes a measure of public-law liability. Special attention is devoted to the possibility of converting property into state revenue through anti-corruption claims in relation to subjects who enjoy constitutional guarantees, namely, judges. With regard to the conversion of judges’ property (including that of retired judges) into state revenue under subparagraph 8 of paragraph 2 of Article 235 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation in proceedings brought by the Prosecutor’s Office, the author concludes that there is a need to develop new special legislative regulation of such relations, which would take into account the fundamental constitutional principles of judicial independence and inviolability in order to exclude any possibility of discrediting the judicial community.

1. Ababkova AYu. Problems of Pledge and Rental of Property upon Termination of Ownership of a Person Who has Committed a Corruption Offense. Civilist. 2025;4:69-78. (In Russ.).

2. Bochkarev SA. The Statute of Limitations as the Unfulfilled Hope of Corrupt Officials. Journal of Russian Law. 2025;4:104-121. (In Russ.).

3. Braginsky MI, Vitryansky VV. Contract law: General provisions. Moscow; 1997. (In Russ.).

4. Golomanchuk EV, Orlova ER, Popov KA. Comparative Analysis of Confiscation and Conversion of Property to State Revenue as Grounds for Termination of Ownership. Property Relations in the Russian Federation. 2024;10:77-89. (In Russ.).

5. Ioffe OS. Responsibility under Soviet civil law. In: Selected works: In 4 vols. Vol. 1: Legal relations under Soviet civil law. Soviet civil law liability. St. Petersburg; 2003. (In Russ.).

6. Ivanova AA. A Fine as a Type and Measure of Punishment for Unconditional Crimes of Corruption. Lex russica. 2025;78(2):66-80. (In Russ.).

7. Kirpichnikov AI. Bribe and corruption in Russia. St. Petersburg: Alpha Publ.; 1997. (In Russ.).

8. Lomidze OG, Lomidze EYu. Civil law presumptions imposing the duty of proof on the defendant. Russian Justice. 2025;3:57-72. (In Russ.).

9. Malbin DA. Commentary on the decision of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of October 31, 2024 No. 49-P. Civilist. 2025;1:5-19. (In Russ.).

10. Nosov DV, Ustinova AV. On The Limitation of Action in case of Forced Legal Succession in the Event of Forfeiture to the Russian Federation of Property Without Submitted Data Confirming Acquisition of such Property Using Legitimate Income. Economy and Law. 2025;6:18-33. (In Russ.).

11. Shobukhin VYu. Anti-Corruption Education in the Activities of Prosecutors and Peculiarities of its Legal Regulation. Lex russica. 2021;74(8)(177):46-57. (In Russ.).

12. Sklovsky KI. Enforcement of the Law on the Recovery of Property Obtained In Violation of the Anti-Corruption Act. Vestnik ekonomicheskogo pravosudiya Rossiyskoy Federatsii. 2021;11:156-186. (In Russ.).

13. Vavilin EV. Principles of civil law. Mechanism for the implementation and protection of civil rights. Saratov State Law Academy Publ.; 2012. (In Russ.).