Unjustified enrichment and restitution in social security legal relations
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu32.2024.124Abstract
The article is devoted to the consideration of the grounds and prospects for the use of the mechanism of restitution in the law of social security. The authors argue that the industry has developed a need for a legal structure regulating cases of unjustified or excessive provision of social security to citizens. This thesis is illustrated by an analysis of current regulatory legal acts and emerging judicial practice. In resolving disputes of the category considered in the article, the courts took the path of borrowing a private law mechanism of restitution, which is generally supported by the authors. At the same time, the article focuses on the need to comply with the rules developed by science for borrowing private law structures by social security law, including ensuring the sectoral adaptation of the implemented legal instrument. In this regard, the authors draw attention to the position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, formulated in Resolution of 14.01.2016 no. 1-P. In the work, this position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation is regarded as focusing on a specific industry adaptation of the borrowed legal structure of restitution for the purposes of social security law. The authors emphasize that when the parties to the social security legal relationship return to the state preceding the violation of the law, it is necessary to formalize the distribution of the burden of adverse consequences of the error of the authorized body on the basis of the general legal principle of justice, excluding a formal approach to resolving the legal situation. This involves taking into account the specifics of the life situation in which the citizen is, the duration of the period during which he received the social payment assigned by mistake, as well as other significant circumstances.
Keywords:
restitution, unjust enrichment, social payment, social security, legal aid, adaptation
Downloads
References
Библиография
Благодир, Алла Л. 2014. Система права социального обеспечения. Дис. … д-ра юрид. наук. Москва.
Былков, Валерий В. 2004. Проблемы правоотношений, возникающих вследствие неосновательного обогащения. Автореф. дис. … канд. юрид. наук. Краснодар.
Васильева, Юлия В. 2010. Кодификация российского законодательства о социальном обеспечении: теоретические и практические проблемы. Дис. … д-ра юрид. наук. Москва.
Гордон, Михаил В. 1960. Лекции по советскому гражданскому праву. Ч. 2. Харьков: Изд-во Харьковского ун-та.
Джанаева, Анна М. 2015а. «Соотношение реституции и неосновательного обогащения: чему учит опыт стран англо-американской правовой системы.» Журнал зарубежного законодательства и сравнительного правоведения 6: 1014–1022.
Джанаева, Анна М. 2015б. Понятие реституции: сравнительно-правовой анализ института в российской и англо-американской системах права. Дис. … канд. юрид. наук. Москва.
Дорошенко, Егор Н. 2018. «Конституционные стандарты достойной жизни и свободного развития человека при проведении пенсионной реформы.» Актуальные проблемы российского права 12: 39–54.
Корсаненкова, Юлия Б. 2019. «Виды межотраслевых связей права социального обеспечения.» Право и государство: теория и практика 12 (180): 124–126.
Красюков, Андрей В. 2020. «Понятие и виды неосновательного налогового обогащения.» Налоги 6: 3–7.
Новак, Денис В. 2006. Неосновательное обогащение в гражданском праве: сравнительно-правовое исследование. Автореф. дис. … канд. юрид. наук. Москва.
Петюкова, Оксана Н. 2021. «Занятость населения и реализация прав граждан на свободное использование своих способностей для предпринимательской и иной экономической деятельности.» Современный юрист 4: 8–20.
Проблемы Общей части права социального обеспечения. 2017. Под ред. Э. Г. Тучковой. Москва: Проспект.
Пузырева, Александра А. 2020. Пределы использования частноправовых конструкций в праве социального обеспечения. Дис. … канд. юрид. наук. Екатеринбург.
Скловский, Константин И. 2008. Собственность в гражданском праве. 4-е изд., перераб. и доп. Москва: Статут.
Скловский, Константин И., и Юрий В. Ширвис. 2000. «Последствия недействительности сделки.» Закон 5: 112–113.
Смолицкая, Елена Е. 2016. Гражданско-правовые институты, понятия и термины в налоговом праве. Дис. … канд. юрид. наук. Москва.
Тузов, Даниил О. 1999. Реституция в гражданском праве. Дис. … канд. юрид. наук. Томск.
Филиппов, Петр М. 2017. «Современное толкование обязательства вследствие неосновательного обогащения (глава 60 Гражданского кодекса Российской Федерации).» Алтайский юридический вестник 1: 160–162.
Хейфец, Феликс С. 1999. Недействительность сделок по российскому гражданскому праву. Москва: Юрайт.
References
Blagodir, Alla L. 2014. Social security law system. PhD thesis. Moscow. (In Russian)
Bylkov, Valery V. 2004. Problems of legal relations arising as a result of unjustified enrichment. PhD thesis abstract. Krasnodar. (In Russian)
Dzhanaeva, Anna M. 2015a. “The ratio of restitution and unjustified enrichment: What the experience of the countries of the Anglo-American legal system teaches.” Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel’stva i sravnitel’nogo pravovedeniia 6: 1014–1022. (In Russian)
Dzhanaeva, Anna M. 2015b. The concept of restitution: A comparative legal analysis of the institution in the Russian and Anglo-American legal systems. PhD thesis. Moscow. (In Russian)
Doroshenko, Egor N. 2018. “Constitutional standards of decent life and free human development during pension reform.” Aktual’nye problemy rossijskogo prava 12: 39–54. (In Russian)
Filippov, Petr M. 2017. “Modern interpretation of the obligation due to unjustified enrichment (Chapter 60 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).” Altajskij juridicheskij vestnik 1: 160–162. (In Russian)
Gordon, Mihail V. 1960. Lectures on Soviet civil law. Pt 2. Kharkiv: Izdatel’stvo Khar’kovskogo un-ta Publ. (In Russian)
Hejfec, Felix S. 1999. Invalidity of transactions under Russian civil law. Moscow: Iurait Publ. (In Russian)
Korsanenkova, Julia B. 2019. “Types of intersectoral relations social security rights.” Pravo i gosudarstvo: teoriia i praktika 12 (180): 124–126. (In Russian)
Krasjukov, Andrey V. 2020. “The concept and types of unjustified tax enrichment.” Nalogi 6: 3–7. (In Russian)
Novak, Denis V. 2006. Unjustified enrichment in civil law: A comparative legal study. PhD thesis abstract. Moscow. (In Russian)
Petjukova, Oksana N. 2021. “Employment of the population and realization of the rights of citizens to freely use their abilities for entrepreneurial and other economic activities.” Sovremennyj yurist 4: 8–20. (In Russian)
Problems of the General part of social security law. 2017. Ed. by E. G. Tuchkova. Moscow: Prospekt Publ. (In Russian)
Puzyreva, Alexandra A. 2020. The limits of the use of private law constructions in social security law. PhD thesis. Ekaterinburg. (In Russian)
Sklovskij, Konstantin I. 2008. Property in civil law. 4th ed., rev. and add. Moscow: Statut Publ. (In Russian)
Sklovskij, Konstantin I., and Jury V. Shirvis. 2000. “Consequences of invalidity of the transaction.” Zakon 5: 112–113. (In Russian)
Smolickaja, Elena E. 2016. Civil law institutions, concepts and terms in tax law. PhD thesis. Moscow. (In Russian)
Tuzov, Daniil O. 1999. Restitution in civil law. PhD thesis. Tomsk. (In Russian)
Vasil’eva, Julia V. 2010. Codification of Russian legislation on social security: Theoretical and practical problems. PhD thesis’. Moscow. (In Russian)
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Articles of "Russian Journal of Labour & Law" are open access distributed under the terms of the License Agreement with Saint Petersburg State University, which permits to the authors unrestricted distribution and self-archiving free of charge.
