GCh / SC: The inflation index and penalty rule should be applied to all monetary obligations

According to the frequent 2 Art. 625 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, the debtor, who has delayed the fulfillment of the monetary obligation, on the demand of the creditor is obliged to pay the amount of debt, taking into account the established inflation index for the entire time of delay, as well as three percent annual from the overdue amount, if another interest rate is not set by the contract or by law

sud

However, we should note that another article of the Civil Code of Ukraine, namely Art. 509 stipulates that the obligation is a relationship in which one party (the debtor) is obliged to act in favor of the other party (the creditor) in a certain act (to transfer the property, to perform work, to provide a service, to pay money, etc.) or to refrain from committing a certain action (a negative obligation), and the creditor has the right to demand from the debtor fulfillment of his duty.

Grounds for the occurrence of such obligations are set in Art. 11 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, in particular:

- contracts and other transactions;

- creation of literary, artistic works, inventions and other results of intellectual, creative activity;

- the problem of property (material) and moral harm to another person;

- other legal facts.

Under the circumstances of the case, the decision of which was reviewed by the Supreme Court, the person filed a lawsuit on the collection of inflationary losses and 3% per annum for the late execution of the obligation in respect of the recovery from the defendant in its favor of UAH 770,000 of material damage and UAH 10,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage.

The courts of the first two instances were satisfied with the claims. In his cassation complaint, the defendant insisted that the requirements of Article 625 of the Civil Code of Ukraine regulate the binding relationship and apply to a violation of a monetary obligation that existed between the parties prior to the court decision (contractual obligation), and therefore these requirements should not apply to the controversial legal relationship that arose out of a non-contractual obligation (tort), since they did not enter into a written contract.

Maintaining the decision of the courts of previous instances, the Grand Chamber reminded that the task of property (material) and non-pecuniary damage creates an obligation between the person who caused the damage and the victim. Depending on the content of such an obligation, it may be monetary or non-monetary.

The analysis of the norms of Art. 625 of the Civil Code of Ukraine stipulates that this article defines the general rules of liability for violation of any monetary obligation, regardless of the grounds for its occurrence (contract or tort). That is, the requirements of Article 625 of the Civil Code of Ukraine apply to all types of monetary obligations, unless otherwise provided by an agreement or special rules of the law, which regulates, in particular, certain types of obligations.

As a result, by such a decision the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court departed from the legal position of the Supreme Court in its ruling of 20 January 2016 in the case  № 6-2759tss15according to which the legal relations arising out of execution of court decisions are regulated by the Law of Ukraine "On Enforcement Proceedings" and they can not be applied to the norms that provide for civil and legal liability for non-fulfillment of a monetary obligation, incl. Art. 625 of the Civil Code of Ukraine (Decree of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court dated May 16, 2018 in case  № 686/21962/15-ts).

Read 356 times