Monetary obligations in civil law. Features of fulfillment of monetary obligations

MONETARY LIABILITIES

civil legal relations aimed at redistributing monetary values and including the right of the creditor to claim the debtor for the transfer of ownership of a certain amount of funds.

It is necessary to distinguish between two types of D.o.:

a) obligations that necessarily involve the transfer of a sum of money:

b) obligations that only allow such transfer. Joining D.o. of the first type, their parties are aware of the fact of their participation in the process of macroeconomic monetary circulation and, moreover, the goal of the obligation assumes precisely the result of such participation. These are obligations from credit agreements, loans, financing, bank account and deposit, bank deposit, and a number of others, usually qua-

registered as banking. VD.o. of the second type, the parties consider each other as participants in trade turnover (circulation of goods, work, services, information, etc.); The goal of redistributing funds is not pursued by them, although it is allowed and indirectly achieved. These are the obligations from contracts of purchase and sale, delivery, commission, contract, lease, storage, etc., in which the payment of a sum of money is only a secondary, counter-obligation, the so-called causa solvendi. Opposes them causa proxima - nearest target obligations - transfer of a thing, execution of an order, use of a thing, storage of a thing, etc.

Before. with the participation of a bank or other professional participant in the money (stock) market are called bank obligations.

A liability is considered monetary if it is expressed in national currency. If the obligation is expressed in foreign currency, it is recognized as monetary in the manner and under the conditions determined by law or in the manner established by it (clauses 1.3 of Article 317 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

To reduce the risk of inflationary losses of the creditor under D.o. it is possible to fix the amount of D.o. in foreign currency or conventional monetary units. In practice, this provision should be implemented by using a system of clauses (commodity, gold, currency, index, etc.) (Part 2 of Article 317 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

Place of execution of D.o. the place of residence (location) of the creditor at the time the obligation arises is considered (Article 316 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). At the same time, the article stipulates that another place of performance may be determined by law, other legal acts or agreement, or may be evident from business customs or the essence of the obligation. Therefore, although, for example, obligations from shares, bills, bonds, certificates, checks are monetary, they are usually fulfilled at the location of the debtor. The obligation to provide a loan is monetary, but not a single bank (debtor) will send its representative to the creditor so that the latter is issued the loan amount at his location. The obligation to return the deposit is monetary, but is fulfilled at the location of the bank (debtor). The examples can be continued.

The moment of termination of any D.o:

By non-cash payments the moment the amount of money is credited to the lender's bank account is considered.

In conditions when the majority of settlements are carried out non-cash, each bank taking part in them has the opportunity to uncontrollably retain deposits recorded in its correspondent account. cash and use them at your own discretion. In this case, losses resulting from the delay of funds, as well as the costs and burden of finding them, fall on the payer (he can be released from the obligation on him only from the moment the money reaches the creditor, for example, is credited to his current account) .

The impossibility of fulfilling the DO, which occurred as a result of: the absence of the creditor or the person authorized by him to accept execution, in the place where the obligation must be fulfilled; or the incapacity of the creditor and the absence of his representative; or an apparent lack of certainty as to who is the creditor of the obligation, in particular in connection with a dispute on this matter between the creditor and other persons; or the creditor’s evasion from accepting execution; or other delay on his part - allows the debtor to free himself from the obligation by depositing its subject matter with a notary office or court (clause 1 of Article 327 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

Before. may arise not only by agreement, but also by the will of only one of the parties, for example, as a result of a creditor’s claim for compensation for losses, as well as - in addition to the will of the parties, harm to health, obligations due to unjust enrichment, discovery, alimony).

For the use of funds in violation of the D.O. (wrongful withholding, evasion of return, other delay in payment or other unjustified acquisition or saving of funds) the law establishes special liability - payment of interest on the amount of these funds, calculated at the discount rate of bank interest on the day of execution of the D.O. (Article 395 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

Before. under all conditions are divisible, the rules on the impossibility of performance due to the destruction of the subject of the obligation, the impossibility of restoring lost banknotes, etc. are not applicable to them.

Lit.: Belov V.A. Legal nature of interest under Article 395 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation // Business and banks. 1996, No. 14. P. 1-2; Vasiliev E.A. Execution of monetary obligations (English judicial practice)//Soviet state and law,

1975, No. 6. P. 113-117; Gurevich I.S. Time and place of fulfillment of monetary obligations of socialist organizations//Soviet justice, 1973, No. 19. P. 11;Lunts L.A. Monetary obligation in civil and conflict of laws of capitalist countries. M., 1948; his:

Money and monetary obligations // Essays on credit law: Sat. articles. M., 1926. P. 5-37; his: Money and monetary obligations: Legal research. M., 1927; Rosenberg M.G. Responsibility for failure to fulfill a monetary obligation. M., 1995; Sadikov O.N. Payment of interest on monetary obligations//Economy and Law, 1987, No. 8. P.48-51.

Belov V.A.

Encyclopedia of Lawyer. 2005 .

See what “MONETARY OBLIGATIONS” is in other dictionaries:

1) obligations of an enterprise, firm to pay money, pay bills and claims, including payment of accrued wages, presented cash invoices (payment requests), payment of declared dividends, payment of taxes and other payments... Economic dictionary

See Cash liabilities Dictionary of business terms. Akademik.ru. 2001... Dictionary of business terms

Monetary obligations- (cash liabilities) 1) obligations of a legal or individual person to pay money, pay bills, claims; 2) the state’s obligations to pay for government orders, repurchase bonds, pay social benefits, etc... Economic and mathematical dictionary

monetary obligations- 1. Obligations of a legal or natural person to pay money, pay bills, claims. 2. Obligations of the state to pay for government orders, repurchase bonds, pay social benefits, etc. [OAO RAO "UES of Russia"… … Technical Translator's Guide

Debts, indebtedness Dictionary of Russian synonyms ... Synonym dictionary

monetary obligations- 1) obligations of an enterprise or firm to pay money, pay bills and claims, including payment of accrued wages, submitted cash bills (payment demands), payment of declared dividends, payment of taxes and other... ... Dictionary of economic terms

1) obligations accepted in monetary form to pay money, pay bills and claims; liabilities, including payment of accrued wages, presented cash invoices (payment requests), payment of declared dividends, payment of taxes... ... encyclopedic Dictionary economics and law

monetary obligations- ‘money’ Syn: debts, debt… Thesaurus of Russian business vocabulary

MONETARY LIABILITIES- must be expressed in Belarusian rubles (clause 1 of article 141 and clause 1 of article 298 of the Civil Code). A monetary obligation may stipulate that it is payable in Belarusian rubles in an amount equivalent to a certain amount in foreign currency or in... ... Legal Dictionary of Modern Civil Law

Monetary obligations of the recipient of budget funds- monetary obligations are the responsibility of the recipient budget funds pay the budget, an individual and a legal entity at the expense of the budget certain funds in accordance with the fulfilled conditions of a civil legal transaction,... ... Official terminology

Books

Monetary obligations: trends in the development of doctrine and judicial practice, Dobrachev Denis Viktorovich. The book reveals the concept of monetary obligation, the relationship between monetary debt and losses in certain civil legal relations; the influence of the figures of the creditor and debtor on the formation...

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Ministry of Education and Science Russian Federation

"Law Institute"

Faculty of Jurisprudence

Essay

Monetary obligations in civil law

Gribanov A.S.

Moscow, 2015

Introduction

One of the most controversial issues"Monetary law" is the question of the content of monetary obligations. This question at the same time serves as the main problem of the legal doctrine of money.

The abstract is devoted to the study of opinions regarding the concept of "monetary obligation", its essence and distinctive features. Since the concept of “monetary obligation” has become firmly established in our lives, I consider it relevant this topic. In my work, I will reveal as broadly and clearly as possible the meaning of a monetary obligation, how it appears and on what basis it ends. In our time, when every person knows what a loan is, we must know how to fulfill our financial obligations and what will happen if they are not fulfilled at all or partially fulfilled.

Monetary obligations have been created by the laws of many countries to settle civil proceedings and to balance their actions. In legal practice, documentary evidence acts as a monetary obligation, for example, in order to: pay monetary compensation, in case of delay, in cases where the debtor does not fulfill his obligations at all, a loan agreement is drawn up or, as it is also called in common parlance, a receipt agreement . Acts as a guarantee for the creditor that the debtor will consistently fulfill his monetary obligations, which he promised to the creditor in verbal form.

Of course, if you have undertaken a monetary obligation to pay the debt to the creditor and interest for the use of his personal funds, you must keep your promises (obligations).

Failure to meet your monetary obligation may result in legal proceedings with the creditor. Which in any case, if you have legal documents stating that you took a certain amount of money will lead you to have to pay not only the debt, but also damage to the creditor as compensation for the fact that you did not fulfill the imposed you have financial obligations. No one has ever succeeded in taking some material goods and not paying money for it.

Monetary obligation: concept and essence

Within the framework of civil legal relations, monetary obligations often arise. Their nature may be different. Thus, they can arise by virtue of a contract. Or, for example, they may be determined by certain provisions of the law.

It should be noted that the meaning of money is predetermined by the tasks that it performs in economic circulation, where it acts as a measure of value, the scale of prices, a medium of circulation, payment, savings and accumulation, and an international purchasing medium.

The fulfillment by money of the functions of a measure of value consists in assessing the value of goods by setting prices depending on the amount of socially necessary labor spent on the production of certain types of goods.

Money as a medium of exchange is used to pay for purchased goods. A special feature of this function of money is that the transfer of goods to the buyer and payment for it occur simultaneously, in contrast to the use of money as a means of payment, where money in whole or in part for things, works, services can be paid before the transfer of things, performance of works and services , and after, and sometimes with a significant gap in time.

Money, which does not directly participate in economic circulation, in turn, serves as a means of accumulation.

It should be noted that when analyzing the legal nature of money, attention is first paid to its commodity origin; This is due to the fact that in Art. 128 of the Civil Code, money directly refers to one of the varieties of things.

The prevailing opinion among Russian legal scholars is that the transfer of funds to a current account in a credit institution is recognized as the fulfillment of a monetary and not another obligation.

In this regard, money includes the following objects of civil rights:

Things endowed by law with the force of legal tender (coins, banknotes, i.e. cash);

Things actually used in civil circulation as a universal means of circulation and payment, unless otherwise provided by law (checks, bills, non-cash money in accounts with credit institutions).

In addition, the draft Federal Law “On the fulfillment of monetary obligations under transactions made using special technological means” classifies bank cards, codes, and other technological means as money.

Being, in essence, a commodity that functions as a measure of the value of other goods, which is their absolute economic usefulness, money is also the subject of obligations. But not only obligations, but also other legal relations contain an actual or potentially monetary component. To a certain extent, M.M. is right. Agarkov, who pointed out that the participation of money in civil circulation sometimes creates the impossibility of a clear, categorical and consistent distinction between various sub-sectors and institutions of civil law when regulating and protecting the norms of property and non-property relations that constitute the subject of civil law.

Being a generic, divisible, mobile and consumable thing, money can replace any other object of property rights. As noted by A.P. Sergeev, money can pay off any property debt, unless this is prohibited by law or unless the creditor objects to this.

Using the terminology of economics, we can talk about the participation in civil circulation of two types of monetary obligations: firstly, those involving the transfer of a sum of money and not existing without it; secondly, only allowing such transfer insofar as their parties consider each other as participants in the turnover of goods. When entering into obligations of the first type (money is the subject of the contract), the parties are aware of the fact of their participation in the process of macroeconomic money circulation and, moreover, the goal of the obligation is the result of such participation. In obligations of the second type (money equivalent), the goal of redistributing funds by the participants in the relationship is not pursued, although it is allowed and achieved indirectly. Moreover, the content of all monetary obligations without exception is the payment of money as their object. It is the payment of a certain amount of money on the grounds provided for by law or contract that is the main purpose of monetary obligations.

In this case, the fulfillment of monetary obligations occurs through cash and non-cash payments. It should be noted that in the literature the opinion has been expressed that non-cash payments are not the movement of funds, but the movement of monetary obligations, which, of course, cannot be agreed with, since the current legislation considers non-cash transfers of funds as nothing other than a payment (clause 1 Article 140, paragraph 2 of Article 861 of the Civil Code).

In conditions of stable market relations, monetary and credit obligations should develop in parallel, mutually complementing each other in servicing the sphere of production and consumption of material assets.

At the same time, credit and monetary obligations should not be identified, due to the difference in their legal nature. It seems that credit legal relations should be subject to clearer legal regulation, since sometimes their use in contractual relations, not controlled by law, entails various abuses.

It should be noted that monetary obligations in most countries of the world are identified and isolated into an independent legal category, and this seems justified, at least based on the importance that money has in civil circulation.

Meanwhile, although the current civil legislation quite clearly distinguishes monetary obligations into an independent legal category, unfortunately, it does not provide a legal definition of these obligations, as has been repeatedly indicated in scientific publications.

Available in Art. 2 of the Federal Law “On Insolvency (Bankruptcy)” the formulation of the concept of a monetary obligation, defining it as the obligation of the debtor to pay the creditor a certain amount of money under a civil transaction and (or) other grounds provided for by law, does not contain the characteristic and distinctive features of the monetary obligation itself.

The conditions for the emergence of a monetary obligation are the existence of a legal relationship that has arisen regarding certain material or intangible benefits, and the participation in this legal relationship of at least two entities - those authorized to demand payment of the debt (creditor) and those obligated to make payment (debtor). The payment itself is a targeted action aimed at repaying an existing monetary debt. As noted, in the absence of such a purpose, the obligation cannot be recognized as monetary, even if its subject is banknotes (storing money in a safe, etc.).

This approach is fully consistent with established judicial and arbitration practice. Thus, the joint Plenum of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation in Resolution No. 13/14 of October 8, 1998 “On the practice of applying the provisions of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on interest for the use of other people’s funds” indicated that a monetary obligation is an obligation by virtue of which the debtor is obliged to pay money. Monetary obligations in which banknotes are used not as a means of repaying a monetary debt, but for another purpose, are not considered. Thus, the client’s delivery of cash to the bank under a cash service agreement, currency exchange transactions, gifts and donations of money, as well as obligations to pay money based on the administrative or other authority of one party to the other are not monetary obligations.

It should be noted that the payment itself, i.e., the fulfillment of a monetary obligation, does not in any case imply the receipt of banknotes in the form of bills or coins from the debtor to the creditor. The law allows for both cash and non-cash payments made in the form of settlements by payment orders, letters of credit, checks, collections, etc. At the same time, there is a well-founded opinion, expressed by a number of authors in publications, that the transfer of a bill, check and other securities that are not money in the literal sense cannot be considered as a monetary payment and represent either a replacement for such a payment or a method of receiving it, i.e., in fact, it is like a conditional payment.

The mandatory conditions of a monetary obligation also indicate the currency of payment, the time of execution and the payment details of the parties.

Based on the foregoing, the definition of a monetary obligation can be formulated by isolating general provisions from the concept of obligation, adding to this the specific features inherent in a monetary obligation.

Thus, in cases where one person (the debtor), in accordance with the grounds and conditions of the obligation, is obliged to pay a certain amount of money to another person (the creditor), and the creditor has the right to demand that the debtor fulfill this obligation, then a monetary obligation occurs.

This definition of a monetary obligation is fully consistent with its features listed in the law and corresponds to its generally accepted characteristics available in the scientific literature.

Origin and termination of monetary obligations

Monetary obligations are almost always bilateral in nature. The obligations of one of the parties to fulfill monetary obligations in relation to the second party almost always correspond to the obligation of the second party to perform certain actions. Exceptions to this rule can only be gift agreements, for which there is no counter-obligation. The grounds for the occurrence of monetary obligations may be:

1) contracts and other transactions provided for by law, as well as contracts and transactions, although not provided for by law, but not contrary to it;

2) acts of state bodies and local government bodies, which are provided by law as the basis for the emergence of civil rights and obligations;

3) judgment, establishing civil rights and obligations;

4) acquisition of property on the grounds permitted by law;

5) causing harm to another person;

6) unjust enrichment;

7) other actions of citizens and legal entities;

8) events with which the law or other legal act connects the onset of civil legal relations.

Termination of an obligation represents the termination of the rights and obligations of participants in legal relations. Methods for terminating obligations are established in Chapter. 26 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation: fulfillment of an obligation, provision of compensation, offset, novation, forgiveness of debt, impossibility of fulfillment, termination on the basis of an act government agency, death of a citizen, liquidation of a legal entity.

When one of the parties fulfills the relevant obligations stipulated by the contract, these obligations to the other party are terminated, and the contract is considered fulfilled. These obligations are considered fulfilled when they are accepted by the counterparty under the contract, and there are relevant documents indicating the fulfillment of obligations.

The provision of compensation is as follows: by agreement between the parties to the contract, one of the parties having obligations under the contract may be released by the other party, to whom these obligations must be fulfilled, from their fulfillment in any part or in full. Compensation involves the termination of an obligation without the creation of a new obligation.

Offset is an agreement between the parties to the contract, as a result of which the claims of the parties to the contract are mutually extinguished. The law establishes certain requirements for the repayment of obligations by offset. To do this, the following conditions must be present: a) the parties’ demands must be counter-in nature; b) the obligations of the parties must be homogeneous; c) the deadline for the counterclaim has arrived at the time of offset or is not specified, or is determined by the moment of demand; d) an application from one of the parties is required for offset.

The countervailing nature of claims when carrying out an offset is expressed in the fact that when obligations are fulfilled by offset, the creditor under the obligation provided for in the agreement acts as a debtor under the obligation established by the offset, and vice versa - the debtor under the main obligation acts as a creditor under the obligation established by the offset. Homogeneous obligations are those obligations the subject of which is identical property endowed with similar generic characteristics. Accordingly, offset against monetary obligations is allowed only by the fulfillment of monetary obligations according to the offset claim. It is not allowed to fulfill monetary obligations by providing property by offset.

Novation as a way to terminate an obligation involves replacing an old obligation with a new obligation. Novation is applied upon reaching an agreement on novation between the parties to the contract. Novation, in contrast to offset, provides for the replacement of one obligation with another, which provides for a different subject or method of performance.

Termination of obligations due to impossibility of fulfillment is provided for in paragraph 1 of Art. 416 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, which provides that obligations are terminated due to the impossibility of fulfillment, if such impossibility is caused by circumstances for which neither party is responsible. If the debtor is unable to fulfill the obligation due to the guilty actions of the creditor, then the creditor has no right to demand the return of what he has already fulfilled under the obligation.

Monetary obligations can be terminated by forgiveness of the debt by the creditor to his debtor. Forgiveness of a debt must be formalized in the same way as an obligation. If the obligation is formalized in writing in the form of an agreement, then debt forgiveness is also formalized in writing.

Obligations can be terminated on the basis of an act of a government body, as a result of the death of a citizen or the liquidation of a legal entity acting as a debtor or creditor under the contract.

ANDfulfillment of monetary obligations.

According to Art. 317 of the Civil Code, monetary obligations must be expressed and, accordingly, fulfilled in the national currency - rubles. It is possible to determine the payment in rubles in an amount equivalent to the amount in foreign currency or conventional monetary units, with its calculation at the official exchange rate on the day of payment. This provision of the Civil Code can be used to reduce risks from inflation, however, in conditions of significant fluctuations in exchange rates, the use of such a settlement mechanism does not create reliable guarantees.

Conditional monetary unit th, used by Russian legislation and international treaties in which the Russian Federation participates are special rights borrowing (SDR) is a unit of account of the International Monetary Fund, determined on the basis of the average exchange rate of the main hardest national currencies. The SDR exchange rate in relation to the national currency is periodically published by the Central Bank of the Russian Federation. monetary obligation cash

Settlements on the territory of the Russian Federation in foreign currency in accordance with clause 2 of Art. 140 of the Civil Code are determined by law or in the manner prescribed by it, by instructions of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation. The range of permitted payments in foreign currency is determined by Art. 9 of the Law on Currency Regulation.

In relation to the fulfillment of monetary obligations, first of all, the issue of the possibility of carrying out cash and non-cash payments between the parties must be resolved. Citizens usually pay in cash. For relations between entrepreneurs, legislation and banking practice give preference to non-cash payments, since they speed up money turnover, are technically simpler and can be controlled by the Central Bank of the Russian Federation. For legal entities, a limit is established for permitted cash payments, which currently amounts to 60 thousand rubles.

Due to the large scale and frequency of settlements in the business sector, rules have also been established on the order of repayment of claims for monetary obligations. The amount of the payment made, which is insufficient to fulfill the monetary obligation in full, in the absence of another agreement, repays, first of all, the creditor’s costs of obtaining fulfillment, then interest, and the remainder - the principal amount of the debt (Article 319 of the Civil Code).

Modern market relations, as the experience of many decades has shown, are accompanied by inflation, i.e. a gradual increase in the cost of living and, accordingly, a decrease in the real value of the national currency, which is legal tender (Article 140 of the Civil Code). These negative processes are manifesting themselves, despite the measures taken by the Government of the Russian Federation and the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, in Russia. Therefore, when fulfilling obligations, the question arises about the need to take into account real inflation.

The Civil Code does not use the term “inflation”, but contains a number of norms aimed at overcoming it undesirable consequences. These are, first of all, articles linking payments to the minimum wage and providing for their proportional increase as it grows (Articles 318, 590, 597 of the Civil Code). References to the minimum wage are also contained in a number of other laws regulating civil law relations.

However, by the Federal Law of June 19, 2000 “On the Minimum Wage,” the increase in the minimum wage was retained only to regulate wages and the amount of temporary disability benefits (Article 3), and to calculate payments for civil obligations established depending on from the minimum wage, the concept of a base amount was introduced, equal to 100 rubles from January 1, 2001.

Such a decision cannot be considered successful, because it leads to a significant reduction in the amounts that are subject to payment due to civil obligations defined in the minimum wage, and excludes their subsequent increase, which contradicts the clear text of the above-mentioned articles of the Civil Code. The basic amount should, like the minimum wage, be increased periodically.

A broader formulation aimed at overcoming the consequences of inflation is contained in clause 1 of Art. 1091 of the Civil Code, according to which the amounts of compensation paid to citizens for harm caused to the life or health of the victim are subject to indexation when the cost of living increases. Such indexation is provided for by a number of laws of the Russian Federation on social insurance.

What is inflation as a legal category? When considering claims for accounting for inflation, the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation in a number of cases defined inflation as losses. This legal qualification must be considered erroneous, because inflation is an objective economic process that occurs even with impeccable behavior of the parties to the obligation. In decisions Supreme Court In the Russian Federation, inflation is reasonably characterized not as a measure of civil liability, but as losses in conditions of price instability.

The action in the Russian Federation, as in other countries, of the principle of monetary nominalism, clearly expressed in Art. 140 of the Civil Code (money must be accepted at its nominal value), formally allows the judicial authorities to refuse to satisfy claims that take inflation into account. However, in relation to compensation for losses, the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation, in its letter dated September 10, 1993 No. C-13/OP-276, recognized the validity of taking into account inflation. The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation also made decisions on awarding payments for civil obligations taking into account inflation. This approach meets the requirements of reasonableness and fairness.

The current civil legislation contains rules that make it possible to take into account real inflationary processes not only when collecting losses, but also when making monetary settlements between the parties.

According to Art. 709 of the Civil Code, an approximate price (estimate) can be agreed upon in the contract, and with a fixed price, in the event of a significant increase in the cost of materials and equipment and services provided to the contractor by third parties, he has the right to demand an increase in the established price. This general rule is applicable by virtue of Art. 783 of the Civil Code to contracts for paid services.

A similar approach is expressed in Art. 183 of the APC, according to which the arbitration court of first instance, which considered the case, carries out indexation at the request of the claimant, i.e. taking into account existing inflation, sums of money awarded by the court on the day of execution of the court decision in cases and amounts provided for by federal law or agreement. Thus, the current law takes into account the inflationary realities existing in the country.

To account for inflation it is necessary correct definition its level in relation to specific civil legal relations. Usually the disputing parties base their calculations on general level inflation for the country as a whole or for the corresponding region. However, the official annual reports of Rosstat provide more differentiated information on the level of inflation: in relation to individual sectors of the economy and industries, and broken down by month. These data allow us to more accurately take into account the impact of inflation on liabilities.

Place of fulfillment of monetary obligations.

The place of fulfillment of the obligation is the place where the debtor is obliged to transfer property to the creditor or perform actions that constitute the subject of the obligation. Determining the place of performance is important in many respects, and it affects the monetary payment for a reimbursable obligation (its price).

Firstly, depending on the place of fulfillment of the obligation, the costs of transportation and delivery of the transferred property are distributed among its participants, which in commercial practice is designated by the term free (free). Until the place of fulfillment of the obligation, these expenses are borne by the debtor, and subsequently by the creditor. This distribution of delivery costs is reflected in the price of the property accordingly.

Secondly, if the subject of the obligation is the transfer of property into ownership, then at the place of fulfillment of the obligation the ownership of the property and, accordingly, the risk of its accidental loss and damage is transferred to the creditor (buyer).

Thirdly, the place of fulfillment of the obligation is essential for determining the liability of the debtor under the obligation. The property transferred by the debtor, as well as the work performed by him in terms of quantity, quality and other conditions, must meet the requirements of the obligation precisely at the place of its execution, and for subsequent adverse changes he will not answer as a general rule.

The Civil Code connects some other practically important legal consequences with the place of fulfillment of the obligation. So, by virtue of clause 3 of Art. 393 of the Civil Code, unless otherwise provided by law, other legal acts or contract, when determining damages, the prices that existed in the place where the obligation should have been fulfilled on the day the debtor voluntarily satisfied the creditor’s claim are taken into account, and if the demand was not satisfied voluntarily, - on the day the claim is filed. Based on the circumstances, the court may satisfy the claim for damages taking into account the prices existing on the day of the decision.

The Civil Code contains detailed rules on determining the place of fulfillment of obligations, taking into account the characteristics of their individual types. According to Art. 316 of the Civil Code, if the place of performance is not determined by law, other legal acts or agreement, or is not evident from business customs or the essence of the obligation, performance must be made:

under the obligation to transfer a land plot, building, structure or other real estate - at the location of the property;

under an obligation to transfer goods or other property that involves its transportation - at the place of delivery of the property to the first carrier for delivery to the creditor;

for other obligations of the entrepreneur, to transfer goods or other property - at the place of manufacture or storage of the property, if this place was known to the creditor at the time the obligation arose;

for a monetary obligation - at the place of residence of the creditor at the time the obligation arose, and if the creditor is a legal entity - at its location at the time the obligation arose; if the creditor at the time of fulfillment of the obligation changed his place of residence or location and notified the debtor about this - at the new place of residence or location of the creditor with expenses associated with the change of place of performance being charged to his account;

for all other obligations - at the debtor’s place of residence, and if it is a legal entity - at its location, which is usually the place of its state registration.

As follows from the text of Art. 316 of the Civil Code, the given rules on the place of fulfillment of the obligation are dispositive and can be changed by agreement of the parties in the contract they conclude. In many cases, such changes are advisable, especially for obligations to transfer goods with their transportation, when the condition for fulfillment of the obligation at the location of the buyer is common.

It is doubtful, however, that the general rule of Art. 316 of the Civil Code on its dispositiveness is applicable to the obligation to transfer real estate and the place of fulfillment of such an obligation may be tied by the parties to the agreement not to the location of the real estate, but to another (it is not clear which) place. Such a deviation from the natural and reasonable solution given in Art. 316 of the Civil Code will create legal ambiguities and difficulties.

Liability for failure to fulfill a monetary obligation.

Article 395 establishes provisions governing the special case of liability for failure to fulfill obligations, namely liability for breach of a monetary obligation. The need for special regulation of liability in case of violation of a monetary obligation is explained by the specific subject of such an obligation, which has a special meaning and has properties inherent only to it, the main of which are the universality of money in civil and especially in economic circulation and their universal equivalence.

A violation of a monetary obligation always appears in only one form - as a delay in payment, which also distinguishes it from among other obligations.

In principle, the basis for liability for a monetary obligation is the very fact of violation of this obligation, expressed in the failure to return the relevant funds on time. To establish liability, it is this circumstance that should be decisive, and not the fact that the debtor illegally used these funds.

In an economy built on the basis of the development of market relations, funds belonging to an entrepreneur, as a rule, must be constantly used in the production activities of his enterprise or, at least, lie in the bank, generating appropriate income. At the same time, a creditor who has not received payments due to him is deprived of the opportunity to use this money and is forced to resort to borrowed funds in order to avoid damage that may arise due to the non-repayment of amounts due to him. For the use of borrowed funds, he, naturally, must pay the lender, which is most often a banking institution, a certain amount, usually expressed as a percentage per annum. These expenses of the creditor constitute his losses resulting from the failure to fulfill a monetary obligation on the part of the debtor. The debtor is obliged to compensate the creditor for these losses in the form of interest on the amount of the debt.

Within the meaning of the regulation established by the Civil Code, the exercise of the creditor’s right to receive interest in the event of failure to fulfill a monetary obligation does not imply proof of his actual loss, i.e. the amount of interest actually paid for receiving borrowed funds, as well as the very fact of receiving a loan in connection with the delay in fulfilling a monetary obligation by the debtor.

The creditor does not have to prove the amount of income that the debtor received by illegally using his funds. The creditor's right to receive compensation for losses in the form of interest on the amount of unreturned funds also does not depend on how the debtor used his funds, in particular, what income he received, or whether he used them at all.

To satisfy his claim for the payment of interest on the amount of money that is the subject of the violated obligation, the creditor only needs to prove the amount of the bank interest rate existing at his place of residence or, accordingly, at the location of the legal entity, if the latter is the creditor of the monetary obligation.

This decision is completely justified, since the creditor, in the event of non-receipt of funds due to him from the debtor, turns to the bank that serves him, which, as a rule, is located in the specified location. In addition, the interest rate used by that bank for qualifying customer financing may be considered as evidence of the bank rate prevailing in the bank's location.

The amount of interest payable in case of violation of a monetary obligation, in contrast to the previously valid civil legislation (Civil Code of the RSFSR, Fundamentals of Civil Legislation), is no longer fixed in the Civil Code. This size is determined by the bank interest rate.

Since the Civil Code does not define the concept of “bank interest rate”, based on the generally accepted understanding of the operation of the financial mechanism for servicing turnover, we can come to the conclusion that in this case we mean the rates existing in the financial market, or, in other words, the rates that used by commercial banks when lending to their clients.

Taking into account the diversification of the financial market, when determining the specified rate, the specific obligations associated with the violated monetary obligation, in particular the amount of debt and the period of its use, must be taken into account. If there are several banks in the place where the interest rate is to be set, then the average annual interest rate for the corresponding loans should be used.

As a general rule, the Civil Code establishes that the amount of interest is determined on the day the monetary obligation is fulfilled. Considering that bank interest tends to fluctuate quite seriously, in the event of a long delay, these fluctuations may lead to the fact that, based on this rule, the creditor will not be able to obtain the necessary compensation for losses incurred as a result of the debtor’s violation of the obligation. In order to avoid such a situation, the Civil Code provides for the possibility for the debtor to base his claim on the bank interest existing on the day the claim was filed or on the day the decision was made. The choice of one approach or another remains with the lender.

The amount of annual interest paid for violation of a monetary obligation may be established by law or contract. Taking into account the general trends in the development of civil legislation in the direction of its further liberalization, cases where the amount of interest for non-fulfillment of a monetary obligation will be established by law will probably gradually be reduced to a minimum.

On the one hand, the contractual determination of interest in conditions of market development is becoming increasingly common, since counterparties in many cases in this way try to minimize the impact of fluctuations in the financial market. Although the Civil Code does not directly establish any restrictions on the amount of interest that can be determined in the agreement, this does not mean that the parties can arbitrarily set these amounts. It should be remembered that the Civil Code (Article 10) establishes general limits for the exercise of civil rights, in particular if they are used to restrict competition, as well as abuse of a dominant position in the market.

On the other hand, in the practice of resolving economic disputes by arbitration courts, a stable position has been formed, which consists in the fact that if the parties have agreed on a penalty for failure to fulfill a monetary obligation on time, for example a penalty, then the creditor does not have the right to simultaneously demand from the overdue debtor payment of this penalty and interest for the use of other people's funds, since, within the meaning of the Civil Code, two measures of liability cannot be applied for the same offense.

Violation of a monetary obligation may entail losses for the creditor that are not fully compensated by the payment of interest on the amount of money not received. In this case, the creditor must prove the amount of actual losses caused to him as a result of the debtor’s illegal retention of this amount of money.

At the same time, when deciding on the creditor’s right to receive compensation for such losses, general rules relating to liability for breach of obligation must be applied. Taking into account this circumstance, a situation where losses from violation of a monetary obligation will exceed the bank interest rate for the use of borrowed funds arises quite rarely. This is primarily due to the fact that fluctuations in the bank interest rate mainly reflect economic factors that may give rise to claims for compensation for additional losses, for example, depreciation of funds as a result of inflationary processes.

Interest accrual in case of violation of a monetary obligation is carried out until the actual payment of the amount that is the subject of this obligation. The law, other legal acts or agreement can only establish a shorter period for calculating interest.

The Civil Code does not directly establish the moment at which interest begins to accrue in case of violation of a monetary obligation. Apparently, this moment should be the moment when the creditor’s right to receive the amount due to him was violated. In cases where the deadline for the fulfillment of a monetary obligation is established in advance, such as the deadline for paying the price under a purchase and sale agreement, the accrual of interest begins the next day after the established deadline. If a monetary obligation arises due to a claim presented by the creditor, for example a claim for compensation for losses, then the period of time normally required to make payment in the manner accepted under the circumstances should be added to the date of presentation of the claim.

Judicial practice on the application of the provisions of the Civil Code on interest for the use of other people's funds is summarized in Resolution of the Plenums of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation No. 13/14.

Conclusion

Of the variety of civil legal obligations of a property nature, monetary obligations should be distinguished, distinguishing them from other property obligations.

In conditions of developed market relations, obligations requiring monetary execution are the most common. This is due special properties money as a universal object of civil circulation.

A monetary obligation is understood as the debtor’s obligation to pay the creditor a certain amount of money under a civil transaction and (or) other grounds provided for by the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

Simply put, a monetary obligation in civil legal relations occurs where money is used as a means of payment or a means of repaying a debt, and does not act as a commodity.

The object of monetary obligations are banknotes issued by a particular state. Banknotes that, at the time of fulfillment of the obligation, are legal tender in a given state are considered to have been properly paid. This means that the debtor can pay off monetary obligations, pay the amount of money in these banknotes (legal tender), and the creditor is obliged to accept.

When fulfilling a monetary obligation great importance has the debtor comply with the procedure for its execution.

In a monetary obligation, it is important for the creditor to receive the funds due to him on time and in full, and for the debtor to fulfill it and be freed from the debt burden.

List of used literature

1. Barinov N.A. Problems of coercion in civil law // Civil law. 2012.

2. Belov V.A. Monetary obligations. -LLC "New Legal Culture", 2007.

3. Commentary on Article 395 of the Civil Code “Liability for failure to fulfill a monetary obligation.”

4. Lunts L.A. Money and monetary obligations in civil law. M., 1999.

5. Ed. MM. Rassolov, P.V. Alexy, A.N. Kuzbagarov. Civil law. (Textbook. 4th edition), 2010.

Posted on Allbest.ru

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

International Eastern European University

Course work

Features of fulfillment of monetary obligations

Is done by a student:

Aksenov Igor Georgievich

EBSYU groups - 123

Izhevsk 2014

Introduction

2.1 Fulfillment of monetary obligations

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

For obligations the subject of which are cash payments, it is necessary to introduce special execution rules that take into account the payment functions of money, the use of foreign currencies and the technique of monetary settlements. In addition to the Civil Code, these issues are resolved by currency legislation, rules and instructions of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation. According to Art. 317 of the Civil Code, monetary obligations must be expressed and, accordingly, fulfilled in the national currency - rubles. It is possible to determine the payment in rubles in an amount equivalent to the amount in foreign currency or conventional monetary units, with its calculation at the official exchange rate on the day of payment. This provision of the Civil Code can be used to reduce risks from inflation, however, in conditions of significant fluctuations in exchange rates, the use of such a settlement mechanism does not create reliable guarantees.

The conventional monetary unit used by Russian legislation and international treaties in which the Russian Federation participates is the Special Drawing Rights (SDR) - the unit of account of the International Monetary Fund, determined on the basis of the average exchange rate of the main hardest national currencies. The SDR exchange rate in relation to the national currency is periodically published by the Central Bank of the Russian Federation. Settlements on the territory of the Russian Federation in foreign currency in accordance with clause 2 of Art. 140 of the Civil Code are determined by law or in the manner prescribed by it, by instructions of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation.

The range of permitted payments in foreign currency is determined by Art. 9 of the Law on Currency Regulation. In relation to the fulfillment of monetary obligations, first of all, the issue of the possibility of carrying out cash and non-cash payments between the parties must be resolved. Citizens usually pay in cash. For relations between entrepreneurs, legislation and banking practice give preference to non-cash payments, since they speed up money turnover, are technically simpler and can be controlled by the Central Bank of the Russian Federation.

As for the timing and procedure for non-cash payments, they are determined by the parties to the obligations; advance payment, prepayment, and periodic payments are possible. The calculations themselves are made in accordance with the rules established by the Central Bank of the Russian Federation. Due to the large scale and frequency of settlements in the business sector, rules have also been established on the order of repayment of claims for monetary obligations. The amount of the payment made, which is insufficient to fulfill the monetary obligation in full, in the absence of another agreement, first of all pays off the creditor's costs of obtaining fulfillment, then interest, and the remaining part - the principal amount of the debt.

1. The concept of monetary obligation

In modern legal literature, a monetary obligation is usually understood as a type of obligatory legal relationship, by virtue of which one person (debtor) undertakes to transfer to another person (creditor) (make payment) a certain amount of money, expressed in a monetary unit agreed upon by the parties, having the force of national or foreign currency. A similar definition of a monetary obligation is found in a number of foreign legal systems. For example, in English legal literature, a pecuniary obligation is any obligation by virtue of which the debtor is obliged to pay a fixed, definite, specific or stated amount of money. Arbitration practice follows a similar approach in understanding monetary obligations. That is why, for example, it does not recognize as monetary obligations obligations in which banknotes are not used as a means of repaying a monetary debt: the client’s obligations to hand over cash to a credit institution under a settlement and cash service agreement, the obligations of a collector transporting banknotes, etc. d.

In this regard, it is completely unclear on what basis funds held in a current account with a credit institution are used to fulfill a monetary obligation.

This issue has not yet been resolved in the legal literature. However, as previously noted, this does not prevent the majority of domestic lawyers from adhering to the point of view that the transfer of funds to the creditor’s current account, carried out by the debtor with his consent, is a mode of fulfillment of a monetary obligation, i.e. a genuine payment and not a substitute for performance. This position is substantiated by the institution of delegation (debt transfer): the debtor under a monetary obligation, with the consent of the creditor, replaces himself with another debtor (credit organization of the debtor), as a result of which the creditor, instead of cash, receives the right to claim, incl. to pay cash to the creditor's credit institution.

It is difficult to agree with such arguments, first of all, because the creditor under a monetary obligation himself does not have the right to unconditionally demand the issuance of cash from his credit institution. The exercise of this right is limited by the rules for organizing cash circulation on the territory of the Russian Federation, according to which legal entities can withdraw cash from their current accounts in credit institutions only for the purposes specified in the quarterly cash applications submitted by them to credit institutions (payments of wages, payments social nature, payment of scholarships, payments not related to the wage fund and social benefits, payment of pensions, payment of social insurance benefits, payments for other purposes).

The above issue becomes more acute when analyzing the aspect of non-fulfillment of a monetary obligation in the narrow sense. According to the current legislation of the Russian Federation, the maximum amount for cash payments between legal entities under one transaction is 60 thousand rubles. For exceeding the established amount, a legal entity bears administrative liability in the form of a fine in the amount of 400 to 500 times the minimum wage. Thus, the fulfillment by a debtor organization of a monetary obligation in the narrow sense for an amount exceeding 60 thousand rubles. by paying a certain amount of cash to the creditor-organization is illegal, and, therefore, impossible already at the moment this obligation arises.

At the same time, since the proper fulfillment of a monetary obligation in the narrow sense for the debtor-organization in this situation will be precisely the payment of a certain amount of cash to the creditor-organization, then in the event of failure to pay the specified amount, such an obligation will be considered violated, and the debtor-organization will be subject to entrepreneurial responsibility. If the creditor does not express his consent to the debtor’s fulfillment of a monetary obligation in the narrow sense by transferring funds to the creditor’s current account, then an insoluble situation will arise: the debtor is unable to fulfill such an obligation either by paying cash to the creditor or by transferring funds to the current account creditor.

At the same time, such a transfer cannot be interpreted as a combination of the following actions:

* assignment by the creditor and debtor of the fulfillment of monetary obligations to the credit organizations servicing them;

* termination of a monetary obligation by novation, providing for its replacement with an obligation of the creditor's credit organization to the latter from the bank account agreement.

This is explained by the fact that the assignment of the fulfillment of a monetary obligation to third parties, as well as the novation of a monetary obligation, are allowed only after its occurrence, but not at the moment of its occurrence, and even due to the impossibility of fulfillment.

The main problem is that the current legislation of the Russian Federation does not contain a definition of a monetary obligation, the obligation of a credit organization (relevant division) of the payer to the payer under a payment order, as well as the moments of fulfillment of these obligations. In the arbitration practice of the Russian Federation and in modern legal literature there is no unity in resolving these issues.

Approach No. 1: The moment of fulfillment of the obligation is a transfer, not a deposit of funds

1. According to the Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated September 17, 1996 No. 7289/95, the bank that has received a payment order for the transfer of funds is obliged to write off and transfer them in a timely manner. Depositing funds is not the function of the same bank.

Approach No. 2: The moment of fulfillment of the obligation - transfer of funds for the intended purpose

2. In accordance with the Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated January 9, 1997 No. 3747/96, the bank’s obligation to write off funds from the current account is not limited to the fact of writing off, but includes the transfer of amounts for the intended purpose.

Approach No. 3: The moment of fulfillment of the obligation - remittance of written-off funds to the RCC for their further transfer to the recipient

1. In accordance with the Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated October 29, 1996 No. 2324/96, the bank’s obligation to write off funds from the client’s current account is not limited to the fact of the write-off; the bank must post the written-off amount to the RCC for further transfer to its recipient.

2. According to the Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated January 9, 1997 No. 2279/96, the bank’s obligation to write off funds from the client’s current account is not limited to the fact of the write-off; the bank must post the written-off amount to the RCC for further transfer to its recipient.

3. As follows from the Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated July 22, 1997 No. 2490/97, the bank’s obligation to write off funds from the client’s current account is not limited to the fact of the write-off; the bank must post the written-off amount to the RCC for further transfer to its recipient.

Approach No. 4: The moment of fulfillment of the obligation - crediting funds to the recipient’s current account

1. Based on the Resolution of the Federal Arbitration Court of the Central District dated December 2, 1996 in case No. 211/4, the bank is obliged not only to write off the required amount from the payer’s account, but also to ensure its transfer to the recipient’s account opened in the same or another jar; The payer bank's obligation to fulfill the client's order to transfer funds is considered fulfilled at the moment the money is credited to the recipient's account.

3. As follows from the Resolution of the Federal Arbitration Court of the Moscow District dated April 7, 1998 in case No. KG-A40/596-98, only such execution when the funds are credited to the account can be considered proper execution of the client’s payment orders to transfer funds to recipients recipients of these funds.

4. The Resolution of the Federal Arbitration Court of the Far Eastern District dated March 23, 1999 in case No. F03-A51/99-1/221 states that when making payments by payment orders, the bank that accepted the order is obliged not only to write off the required amount from the payer’s account, but and ensure its transfer to the recipient’s account; the payer bank's obligation to fulfill the client's order to transfer funds is considered fulfilled at the moment the money is credited to the recipient's account

5. In accordance with the Resolution of the Federal Arbitration Court of the Volga-Vyatka District dated May 11, 1999 in case No. A39-2125/98-154/2, the payer bank’s obligation to execute the client’s order to transfer funds is considered fulfilled at the time the money is credited to the account recipient.

6. According to the Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated March 13, 2001 No. 6721/00, the place of fulfillment of a monetary obligation is the location of the creditor at the time of fulfillment of the obligation, therefore, evidence of fulfillment of the obligation is the actual receipt of funds to the creditor’s account.

7. As follows from the Resolution of the Federal Arbitration Court of the Moscow District dated May 8, 2001 in case No. KG-A40/2092-01, when making payments between banks, the place of fulfillment of the obligation is the location of the bank crediting the funds, that is, the funds must be credited to the lender's current account.

8. Based on the Resolution of the Federal Arbitration Court of the Central District dated May 25, 2001 in case No. A62-3873/2000, the payer bank’s obligation to execute the client’s order to transfer funds is considered fulfilled at the moment the money is credited to the recipient’s account and from that moment can The payer's monetary obligation to the recipient of funds is also considered terminated.

Approach No. 5: The moment of fulfillment of the obligation - crediting funds to the correspondent account of the recipient’s bank

1. In the Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated April 19, 1999 No. 5, it is noted that the obligation of the payer bank to the client under a payment order is considered fulfilled at the time of proper crediting of the corresponding amount of money to the account of the recipient bank, if the agreement between the client’s bank account and the payer bank does not provide other.

2-5. A similar conclusion can be drawn by interpreting the Resolution of the Federal Arbitration Court of the Moscow District dated July 6, 1999 in case No. KG-A40/1989-99, the Resolution of the Federal Arbitration Court of the Moscow District dated December 7, 1999 in case No. KG-A40/3992- 99, Resolution of the Federal Arbitration Court of the Central District of February 2, 2000 in case No. KG-A09/4380/99-23 and Resolution of the Federal Arbitration Court of the Moscow District of September 14, 2000 in case No. KG-A40/4025-00.

7. As follows from the Resolution of the Federal Arbitration Court of the Volga District of January 25, 2001 in case No. F12-6757/00-18, a monetary obligation under a civil obligation is considered fulfilled from the moment the amount of money is credited to the correspondent account of the recipient's bank.

8. Based on the Resolution of the Federal Arbitration Court of the Moscow District dated August 8, 2001 in case No. KA-A40/4141-01, the payer’s bank’s obligation to the client under a payment order is considered fulfilled at the time the corresponding amount of money is properly credited to the recipient’s bank account.

The moment of fulfillment of a monetary obligation may not coincide with the moment of fulfillment of settlement obligations by credit institutions;

The result of proper fulfillment of a settlement obligation by a credit institution (relevant division) may not always be fulfillment of a monetary obligation;

The risk of non-fulfillment of a settlement obligation by a credit organization (relevant division) of the payer or a credit organization (relevant division) of the recipient lies solely with the payer.

2. Features of the fulfillment of monetary obligations

2.1 Fulfillment of monetary obligations

Fulfillment of a monetary obligation (payment) is the delivery by the debtor to the creditor of cash (currency) in the amount constituting the subject of the monetary obligation.

The delivery of cash in fulfillment of a monetary obligation (payment) is a special case of settlements for monetary obligations (cash payments). Settlement of monetary obligations refers to the performance of any actions (including payments) that should lead to the termination of a monetary obligation.

Legislation and practice contrast cash payments - the process of transferring banknotes - with non-cash payments, i.e. payments made without the use of cash. “Payments on the territory of the Russian Federation are made by cash and non-cash payments,” proclaims clause 1 of Art. 140 GK. Regulations ch. 46 of the Civil Code regulate a special case of non-cash payments - non-cash payments with the participation of banks. The implementation of non-cash payments is the rule for repaying monetary obligations existing between legal entities.

Since, according to paragraph 3 of Art. 23 GK k entrepreneurial activity citizens, carried out without forming a legal entity, those rules of the Civil Code that regulate the activities of legal entities that are commercial organizations are applied, unless otherwise follows from the law, other legal acts or the essence of the legal relationship, it may seem that the rule on the limit of this cash payment also applies in settlements involving citizens related to their business activities. In reality this is not the case, since clause 3 of Art. 23 of the Civil Code concerns only the norms of the Civil Code, and not banking rules. In addition, the very distinction between citizens’ payments into “related” and “not related” to their business activities is hardly possible.

Features of the legislative regulation of the fulfillment of monetary obligations can be found in a number of norms scattered throughout the Civil Code.

2.2 Place of proper execution of a monetary obligation

According to the general rule formulated in Art. 316 of the Civil Code, if the place of fulfillment of the obligation is not specifically determined by law, other legal acts or agreement, or is not evident from business customs or the essence of the obligation, fulfillment must be carried out at the place of residence (location) of the debtor.

In “practical” language, this rule can be formulated something like this: it is not the debtor who is obliged to run after the creditor and offer him performance, but the creditor, in order to obtain performance, bears the burden of going to the debtor at the place of residence (location) of the latter and presenting him with a demand for execution . From the moment of transfer (receipt) of the subject of execution, which, being carried out at the location of the debtor, means that all rights, encumbrances, expenses, obligations and risks associated with this subject and its delivery to the place of interest to the creditor are transferred to the creditor. Consequently, as a general rule, the debtor releases himself from the obligation by fulfilling it at his location; he is not obliged to deliver the object of performance to the location of the creditor and does not bear the obligations, expenses and risks associated with this delivery.

At first glance, this rule is completely inconsistent with the conditions economic life: every impartial observer knows perfectly well that the creditor himself almost never comes to the debtor for the subject of the obligation; that, on the contrary, it is the debtor who hires the carrier, organizes and pays for transportation, delivers the goods to the carrier’s location, loads it vehicles, which, if necessary, is pre-cleaned and equipped, etc. and so on. But this is only at first glance, which is impartial exactly as much as its bearer is not experienced in jurisprudence. It is appropriate to ask: at whose expense does the debtor do all this? Of course, various options are possible, but the general rule is that all the described and other actions aimed at delivering the subject of execution to the location of the creditor are performed by the debtor, albeit on his own behalf, but at the expense of the creditor. This is eloquently evidenced by the price structure of the supplied goods, one of the elements of which is almost always a fee for transportation and related cargo operations. At the same time, the moment of delivery of the goods for transportation (shipment) is considered the moment of fulfillment of the obligation to transfer the thing (clause 1 of Article 224, Articles 458 and 510 of the Civil Code) - it is from this moment that the debtor relieves himself of the encumbrances, costs and risks associated with subject of the obligation. It is clear that such transfer takes place at the location of the debtor; the debtor’s obligation to deliver things to another place (the location of the creditor or to some intermediate point) cannot be assumed - it must be directly established by the contract with a direct and accurate listing of all those costs, encumbrances and risks that remain with the debtor until the moment the goods arrive at their destination.

This is a general rule. However, for monetary obligations, a different rule applies, exactly the opposite. The place of fulfillment of a monetary obligation is the place of residence (location) of the creditor at the time the obligation arose, and if the creditor at the time of fulfillment of the obligation changed his place of residence (location) and notified the debtor about it, then the place of residence (location) of the creditor at the time of fulfillment of the obligation.

Here, in monetary obligations, we have, therefore, the exact opposite way of distributing the burden and risks associated with performance: it is not the creditor who should run after the debtor and demand performance, but the debtor, in order to free himself from the obligation, is legally obliged to come to the creditor at his place of residence (place location) of the latter and there offer him the performance delivered there by him, the debtor (or on behalf of another person, but, in any case, at his risk and at his expense). Thus, the creditor's obligations under a monetary obligation do not include the presentation of a demand for performance at the location of the debtor; it is enough for the creditor to sit and wait until execution is offered to him, periodically reminding the debtor of this need by mail, telephone or otherwise. A creditor who has received the subject of execution (banknotes) at his location or residence, in principle, cannot incur costs and risks associated with transportation and banknotes: all these costs are paid by the debtor. The debtor under a monetary obligation releases himself from the obligation by performing it at the location of the creditor, and therefore, he is obliged to deliver the subject of performance to the location of the creditor and bears all the obligations, expenses and risks associated with this delivery. Finally, until the moment of transfer of money to the creditor, the debtor has the opportunity to use the money, receive income from it, as a result of which for the entire time the money is with the debtor, up to the moment of its transfer to the creditor at the latter’s location, the debtor is obliged to pay interest to the creditor for the use of money. monetary obligation debtor creditor

The only expenses that the debtor under a monetary obligation has the right to attribute to the creditor are expenses associated with the creditor changing his location (with a change in the place of performance). A claim for such expenses would constitute a special case of a claim for damages. In addition to the fulfillment of a monetary obligation, the debtor may also be released from payment of interest caused by a delay in execution due to a change in location by the creditor due to the creditor’s delay (clause 3 of Article 406 of the Civil Code). Theoretically, one can imagine a situation where the debtor bears additional costs caused by a change in the identity of the creditor. This is exactly the situation that will occur if, for example, a creditor located in the same city as the debtor assigns a claim to a nonresident creditor. Of course, the debtor can recover the difference in the costs of delivering money to a place of execution other than the location of the creditor at the time the monetary obligation arose from the previous creditor or withhold from the new creditor, giving the latter the opportunity to independently “sort out” with his predecessor.

Another rule regarding the place of fulfillment of a monetary obligation may be determined by law, other legal acts or an agreement, or may be evident from business customs or the essence of the obligation. The Civil Code establishes very few exceptions to the general rule regarding the place of fulfillment of a monetary obligation:

- clause 1 art. 142 of the Civil Code - any obligation from a security, incl. and monetary, is executed only if the creditor declares a claim, supported by the presentation of the security itself, i.e. at the place of residence (location) of the debtor for the security;

- clause 2 of Art. 837 and paragraph 2 of Art. 845 of the Civil Code - fulfillment of obligations to issue cash from the amount of a bank deposit or from an account is carried out at the location of the debtor bank.

There is no need to identify with a change in the general rule on the place of performance of a monetary obligation the cases when the Civil Code orders the debtor to carry out the performance solely at the request of the creditor. These are, for example, the cases provided for in paragraph 1 of Art. 374 of the Civil Code (monetary obligation from a bank guarantee) and clause 2 of Art. 845 of the Civil Code (demand for the transfer of money presented on the basis of a bank account agreement). Here we have an intermediate position: on the one hand, the debtor is not obliged to carry out performance until the moment the creditor makes a claim to him, on the other hand, until the performance is received by the creditor, the debtor is not released from the obligation. It can be said that:

- any case where the location of the debtor is recognized as the place of performance of a monetary obligation presupposes that such performance occurs at the initiative (demand) of the creditor;

- however, not every monetary obligation fulfilled at the request of the creditor must necessarily be fulfilled at the location of the debtor (the creditor can remain in his place of residence (location) and from there make a demand for execution).

The rule regarding the location of the creditor as the place of fulfillment of a monetary obligation also determines such a feature of the process of fulfilling a monetary obligation as the uselessness of the fulfillment of the creditor’s claim. Otherwise may be established by law, other legal act, agreement, custom, or follow from the essence of the obligation. The form of such a requirement may be arbitrary; cases when a creditor's claim must be in writing can apparently only be established by law or contract. The Civil Code knows, in fact, only one such case; the other two are determined by contractual practice: a requirement is presented in writing to obtain execution under (1) a bank guarantee, (2) a bank account and (3) a bank deposit (clause 1 of Article 374, clause 2 of Article 837, clause 2 Article 845 of the Civil Code).

2.3 Time (term) for proper fulfillment of a monetary obligation

In accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1 of Art. 314 of the Civil Code, an obligation “... which provides for or provides the opportunity to determine the day of its execution or the period of time during which it must be performed, is subject to execution on the day or, accordingly, at any time within such period.” The absence of any exceptions to this rule makes it possible to assert that it applies to any obligations, incl. and monetary.

The method for establishing the time of fulfillment of an obligation in a situation where the obligation does not provide for a deadline for its fulfillment and does not contain conditions allowing to determine the period is provided for in clause 2 of Art. 314 of the Civil Code and is distinguished by a peculiar “two-stage” nature. The absence of any exceptions here also makes it possible to extend these rules to monetary obligations.

The first stage includes the definition of a “reasonable period”, calculated from the date the obligation arose - during its continuation the obligation is subject to execution. It should be said that determining a reasonable period for the fulfillment of monetary obligations is difficult and can not be carried out in general for all monetary obligations, but only in relation to each specific type of them. So, for example, it is quite obvious that the duration of a reasonable period for fulfilling the obligation to pay the purchase price of an item and, for example, the obligation to repay a loan should be different.

The need to apply the second stage rule arises in two cases: (1) to determine the time of fulfillment of an obligation not fulfilled within a reasonable time; (2) to determine the time of fulfillment of an obligation, the fulfillment period of which is determined by the moment of demand. In any of these cases, the debtor is obliged to fulfill the obligation "...within seven days from the date the creditor presents a demand for its fulfillment, unless the obligation to perform within a different period follows from the law, other legal acts, terms of the obligation, business customs or the essence of the obligation" .

Now it is necessary to consider those exceptions that are made from the stated rules in relation to some individual monetary obligations.

Firstly, the general rule of Art. 314 of the Civil Code must be adjusted taking into account the requirements of paragraph 3 of Art. 810 of the Civil Code, according to which “Unless otherwise provided by the loan agreement, the loan amount is considered repaid at the moment it is transferred to the lender or the corresponding funds are credited to his bank account.” Bearing in mind that the loan is a real contract, i.e. is considered concluded from the moment the lender actually provides funds to the borrower (clause 1 of Article 807, clause 1 of Article 810, Article 812 of the Civil Code), providing a cash loan in economic sense and the conclusion of a monetary loan agreement in the sense of the Civil Code, any transfer of money that is not accompanied by the provision of consideration should be considered. By the way, this is directly evidenced by paragraph 1 of Art. 818 of the Civil Code, which provides that “By agreement of the parties, a debt arising from the purchase and sale, lease of property or other grounds may be replaced by a loan obligation.” The above is, in our opinion, the basis for the conclusion that the norm of paragraph 3 of Art. 810 of the Civil Code should be similarly extended to all monetary obligations: they are considered fulfilled either from the moment the money is transferred to the creditor, or from the moment the amount of money is credited to the creditor’s bank account. It is possible, however, that there is another solution to the issue, from the point of view of “pure theory”, a more thorough one: the monetary obligation should be considered terminated through non-cash payments at the moment the funds are credited to the correspondent account of the bank serving the recipient. The consideration here is very simple: the relationship between the recipient of funds and the servicing bank is the problem of the recipient himself. If these relationships are such that the servicing bank considers it possible to afford to delay crediting to clients' accounts??? funds received for them, then it is clearly not the payer who must deal with this - an entity not connected with the bank serving the recipient in any way. On the other hand, the choice of a bank that can ensure timely and accurate transfer of funds to other banks, incl. to the bank serving their recipient. This decision, generally supported by arbitration practice, does not yet have adequate legislative implementation.

The norm of paragraph 2 of Article 818 of the Civil Code stipulates that “The replacement of a debt with a loan obligation is carried out in compliance with the requirements for innovation (Article 414) and is carried out in the form provided for concluding a loan agreement (Article 808).” Turning to Art. 414, we can easily see that the agreement of the parties only then constitutes an agreement on novation when it provides for the replacement of an obligation with another, with another subject or another method of execution. What changes in our case, i.e. when nominating a debt into a loan obligation - the object or method of execution? Theoretically, the subject can change (there was money - now things) and, for this reason, also the method of execution (there were non-cash payments - now there is the transfer of things). But in practice, neither one nor the other may change, however, a new basis will be provided for the debt (from a purchase and sale agreement, lease, etc.) - an agreement on novation (by the way, concluded in a strictly defined form). In this regard, all those objections that accompanied the debt in its old, existing version, the benefits and security associated with this debt will disappear, the statute of limitations will begin to run again and other similar disturbances will occur.

Thus, the norm of paragraph 2 of Art. 818 Civil Code is a norm that supplements general concept innovations contained in Art. 414 Civil Code. The category of agreements on innovation should include not only agreements that fall under the characteristics of Art. 414, but also agreements on the novation of debts (not necessarily, by the way, only monetary ones) into borrowed obligations (Article 818). The absence of the fact of granting a loan in this situation does not affect the availability and strength of the loan obligation: it is necessary, as is known, to make a difference between the concepts of a loan agreement and a loan obligation. The loan agreement is the main, but not the only possible basis for the emergence of a loan obligation; other possible grounds are novation agreements, as well as the terms of various commercial loan agreements (advance or subsequent payment).

Other existing exceptions relate mainly to the rule formulated in paragraph 2 of Art. 314, i.e. They mean the case when the monetary obligation is such that it does not provide for a deadline for its fulfillment, or its period is determined by the moment of demand.

Conclusion

Through the prism of the specific features of a monetary obligation, we examined one of the controversial issues in civil law, the question of the legal category of a monetary obligation. We came to the conclusion that economic role money as a universal equivalent predetermines the legal properties of money (compensation for damage, the cost of goods, property, termination of obligations, etc.) and special, in our opinion, legal properties of monetary obligations of civil law content such as regulated profitability and distribution of the debtor's payment, multiple exchange rates , currency restrictions, public policy clause to foreign exchange control regulations.

We substantiated the conclusion that the monetary obligation is unilateral in nature according to the model of Art. 307 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and formulated the concept of a monetary obligation of civil law content. When studying the legal nature of a monetary obligation, a distinction was made between a monetary obligation of civil law content and public monetary encumbrances. At the same time, determining the place of monetary obligations in the system of civil obligations made it possible to determine their independent and dependent nature, distinguishing between the actual monetary obligation (credit, loan) and the derivative monetary obligation from civil law contracts for compensation (purchase and sale, contract, etc. ).

When considering questions about the types of monetary obligations and the grounds for their occurrence, their insufficient coverage and development in the theory of monetary obligations was noted. To distinguish between types of monetary obligations, we have proposed various criteria. In particular, the initial purpose of the emergence of a monetary obligation, the presence of a connection with another non-monetary obligation, belonging to internal or external circulation, etc. When considering the scientific classifications of types of monetary obligations contained in the works of L.A. Luntsa, E.A. Sukhanova, L.P. Anufrieva, D.G. Lavrov, the expediency of introducing a different classification into civil law was substantiated and the author’s classification of monetary obligations was proposed.

The dissertation examines the issue of classifying obligations to pay compensation, damages, penalties, confiscation and confiscation as monetary. For this purpose, the opinions expressed in the literature (by V. Belova, P. Khodyreva) on this issue were analyzed and a comparative analysis of the practice of dispute resolution by Russian and German courts was carried out.

In the process of considering the grounds for the occurrence of monetary obligations, the question of the moment of their occurrence was examined. We believe that the moment of occurrence directly depends on the basis for the occurrence of a monetary obligation. As an analysis of practice has shown, this issue becomes especially significant in relation to obligations to return prepayments and secondary monetary obligations.

Investigating problematic issues related to the legal qualification of the execution of a monetary obligation, we came to the conclusion that, in relation to monetary obligations, execution consists of taking certain positive legal actions aimed at paying the monetary debt. Actions can be factual (de facto) or legal (de jure). At the same time, the fulfillment of a monetary obligation can be either voluntary or compulsory in nature, given that the nature of execution is influenced by the distinction between subjective rights into regulatory and protective.

It was found that the current Russian legislation regulating legal relations for the fulfillment of an obligation does not contain a specific separate definition of the concept of “fulfillment of a monetary obligation”, however, it operates along with it with the terms: “satisfaction”, “repayment”, “collection”. This leads to their confusion and ambiguous civil legal qualification of the fact of “fulfillment of a monetary obligation.”

It has been established that in Russian civil law the question of the legal nature of actions to fulfill an obligation is the subject of debate. Some authors qualify them as transactions (R.O. Halfina, Yu.V. Bakhareva), others (V.S. Tolstoy, V. Dashevskaya) as transaction-like actions. We suggested that the refusal to classify such actions as transactions is not entirely justified and we share the point of view expressed by S.S. Alekseev, allowing them to be classified as auxiliary transactions with the possibility of extending the rules on transactions to them, including declaring them invalid.

The dissertation raises the question of the need to distinguish the fulfillment of a monetary obligation from other methods of terminating them. In the Russian literature on civil law, set-off, compensation and novation are considered as different from execution methods of terminating a monetary obligation.

It is noted that judicial and arbitration practice does not always recognize the link contained in the contract to the performance of certain actions to determine the time of fulfillment of a monetary obligation. Therefore, if the text of the agreement includes a condition linking the production of payment to the performance of certain actions by the parties or third parties, we propose to clearly stipulate the timing of their implementation.

It has been determined that for certain types of monetary obligations, special rules have been established for determining the deadline for their fulfillment, which have priority (for example, paragraph 1 of Article 810 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, paragraph 1 of Article 486 of the PS of the Russian Federation). In special rules, when determining the moment of fulfillment of a monetary obligation that binds the creditor and debtor in the obligation, different approaches are used, depending on whether the subject of execution is cash or non-cash funds. We consider the approach set out in the literature to distinguish between the moment of fulfillment of a monetary obligation by the debtor and the moment of fulfillment by the bank of its obligation to carry out settlement transactions to be correct. It is proposed to designate at the legislative level the moment of fulfillment of a monetary obligation in non-cash payments through the fact of the moment the money is credited to the creditor’s current account. We also believe it would be advisable to legalize the practice so that the place and moment of fulfillment of a monetary obligation coincide and are determined by the creditor’s account.

During the analysis of the civil legislation of the Russian Federation regarding the conditions for fulfilling the interest obligation, it was discovered that it does not contain general rules. It is noted that certain instructions in relation to the fulfillment of interest obligations are contained in certain articles of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, while for some types of this obligation, specifics of execution are established.

It is noted that the amount of the interest obligation depends on the amount of the principal debt. One of the features of monetary debt is the ability to generate constant income in the form of interest as payment for the capital provided.

It was revealed that the current Russian civil legislation has not established the possibility of calculating interest on interest or losses. The position of law enforcement agencies is similar. At the same time, taking into account the compensatory nature of the interest obligation, law enforcement authorities, while refusing to satisfy demands for the accrual of interest on interest and losses, nevertheless allow the possibility of their accrual in relation to certain species monetary obligations.

The problems that arise when fulfilling a monetary obligation in the foreign economic sphere are studied. Issues related to the conditions regarding the currency of a monetary obligation, such as price currency, payment currency, currency conversion rate, protective clauses, and the currency in which secondary monetary obligations must be fulfilled, are considered in detail.

The dissertation proves that in order to protect their interests Russian entrepreneurs when agreeing with a foreign counterparty and formulating the currency conditions of a monetary obligation from a foreign trade contract, it is advisable to agree on the currency of the debt and the currency of payment, the procedure for determining the exchange rate: its moment, the type of exchange rate, provide for the most stable currencies, in addition, include protective measures in the text of the foreign trade contract.

Attention is paid to the study of one of the current problems foreign economic turnover related to determining the place of payment execution. This condition for the proper fulfillment of a monetary obligation determines: the law governing relations under the obligation, issues of jurisdiction, payment terms, place of execution of secondary monetary obligations. The study of the rules for the place of fulfillment of a monetary obligation from a foreign economic contract made it possible to establish that if it is impossible to determine the place of fulfillment of a monetary obligation under a foreign trade transaction, the general rule applies - the monetary obligation must be fulfilled at the location of the creditor at the time the obligation arises. Moreover, in contrast to the general rules formulated in Russian civil law, foreign legislation and international conventions contain provisions that more effectively reflect the needs of entrepreneurs in the process of implementing legal remedies.

The features of fulfillment of interest obligations in the foreign economic sphere are shown using materials from the practice of international commercial arbitrations and foreign national courts.

Based on the study of materials judicial practice approaches to the assessment of evidence by the parties of the amount of interest, the admissibility of accruing interest on interest, the calculation of the limitation period for claims for the payment of annual interest, the ratio of claims for interest and losses are determined.

We believe that proposals to change the legal regulation of monetary obligations of civil law in Russian civil law, formulated in the study, will contribute to greater unification and integration of Russian and international legislation.

Bibliography

International legal acts

1. Agreement between the Central Bank of the Russian Federation and the State Bank of Vietnam on the organization of settlements for foreign economic relations dated 08/26/1998. (Moscow) // Bulletin of the Bank of Russia dated 09.09.1998. No. 61.

2. Agreement between the Central Bank of the Russian Federation and the Central Bank of Mongolia on the organization of settlements for foreign economic relations dated 07/01/2003. (Moscow) // Bulletin of the Bank of Russia dated August 18, 2003. No. 46.

Regulatory acts of the Russian Federation

1. Civil Code of the Russian Federation (Part Three) dated November 26, 2001. No. 146-FZ (adopted by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on November 1, 2001), (as amended on December 2, 2004) // SZ RF. 2001. No. 49. - St. 4552.

2. Arbitration Procedural Code of the Russian Federation dated July 27, 2002. No. 95-FZ (adopted by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on June 14, 2002), (as amended on March 31, 2005) // SZ RF. 2002. No. 30. - St. 3012.

3. Federal Law of July 24, 2002. No. 96-FZ “On the implementation of the Arbitration Procedural Code of the Russian Federation” (adopted by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on June 21, 2002) // SZ RF. 2002: No. 30. - St. 3013.

4. Federal Law of December 10, 2003. No. 173-F3 “On currency regulation and currency control” (adopted by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on November 21, 2003), (as amended on June 29, 2004) // SZ RF. 2003. No. 50. - St. 4859.

5. Resolution of the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation dated May 22, 1992. No. 2815-1 "On the entry of the Russian Federation into the International currency board, International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and International Association Development" // Gazette of the SND and the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. 1992. No. 22. - Article 1180.

6. Regulations of the Central Bank of Russia dated October 3, 2002. No. 2-P “On non-cash payments in the Russian Federation” (as amended on June 11, 2004), (registered with the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation on December 23, 2002, No. 4068) // Bulletin of the Bank of Russia dated December 28, 2002. No. 74.

Regulatory acts of foreign countries

1. Per. with German; Scientific editors A.L. Makovsky and others - M.: Wolters Kluwer, 2004. - 816 p.

2. Uniform Commercial Code of the United States (Official text 1990.) // Uniform Commercial Code of the United States: Trans. from English/ Series Modern foreign and international private law. - M.: International Center for Financial and Economic Development, 1996. - 427 p.

3. The Civil Code of Georgia was adopted on June 26, 1997. Entered into force on November 25, 1997. (with amendments and modifications as of November 26, 2001.) // Civil Code of Georgia / Scientific. ed. Z.K. Bigwava. Introductory article by the Chairman of the Supreme Court

Practice of the courts of the Russian Federation

1. Ruling of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated August 17, 1999. No. CAS 99-199 // Bulletin of the RF Armed Forces. 2000. No. 10. - pp. 25-26.

2. Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated July 1, 1996. No. 6/8 “On some issues related to the application of part one of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation” // Bulletin of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation. 1996. No. 9. - P. 5-20.

3. Information mail Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated 05/05/1997. No. 14 “Review of the practice of resolving disputes related to the conclusion, amendment and termination of contracts” // Bulletin of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation. -- 1997. No. 7. - pp. 103-109.

Posted on Allbest.ru

...

Monetary obligations in civil law. Features of fulfillment of monetary obligations

See what “MONETARY OBLIGATIONS” is in other dictionaries:

Books

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Similar documents

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

2.1 Fulfillment of monetary obligations

Fulfillment of a monetary obligation (payment) is the delivery by the debtor to the creditor of cash (currency) in the amount constituting the subject of the monetary obligation.

Features of the legislative regulation of the fulfillment of monetary obligations can be found in a number of norms scattered throughout the Civil Code.

2.2 Place of proper execution of a monetary obligation

- clause 1 art. 142 of the Civil Code - any obligation from a security, incl. and monetary, is executed only if the creditor declares a claim, supported by the presentation of the security itself, i.e. at the place of residence (location) of the debtor for the security;

- clause 2 of Art. 837 and paragraph 2 of Art. 845 of the Civil Code - fulfillment of obligations to issue cash from the amount of a bank deposit or from an account is carried out at the location of the debtor bank.

- any case where the location of the debtor is recognized as the place of performance of a monetary obligation presupposes that such performance occurs at the initiative (demand) of the creditor;

- however, not every monetary obligation fulfilled at the request of the creditor must necessarily be fulfilled at the location of the debtor (the creditor can remain in his place of residence (location) and from there make a demand for execution).

2.3 Time (term) for proper fulfillment of a monetary obligation

Now it is necessary to consider those exceptions that are made from the stated rules in relation to some individual monetary obligations.

Other existing exceptions relate mainly to the rule formulated in paragraph 2 of Art. 314, i.e. They mean the case when the monetary obligation is such that it does not provide for a deadline for its fulfillment, or its period is determined by the moment of demand.

Conclusion

It is noted that the amount of the interest obligation depends on the amount of the principal debt. One of the features of monetary debt is the ability to generate constant income in the form of interest as payment for the capital provided.

The features of fulfillment of interest obligations in the foreign economic sphere are shown using materials from the practice of international commercial arbitrations and foreign national courts.

We believe that proposals to change the legal regulation of monetary obligations of civil law in Russian civil law, formulated in the study, will contribute to greater unification and integration of Russian and international legislation.

Bibliography

International legal acts

1. Agreement between the Central Bank of the Russian Federation and the State Bank of Vietnam on the organization of settlements for foreign economic relations dated 08/26/1998. (Moscow) // Bulletin of the Bank of Russia dated 09.09.1998. No. 61.

2. Agreement between the Central Bank of the Russian Federation and the Central Bank of Mongolia on the organization of settlements for foreign economic relations dated 07/01/2003. (Moscow) // Bulletin of the Bank of Russia dated August 18, 2003. No. 46.

Regulatory acts of the Russian Federation

1. Civil Code of the Russian Federation (Part Three) dated November 26, 2001. No. 146-FZ (adopted by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on November 1, 2001), (as amended on December 2, 2004) // SZ RF. 2001. No. 49. - St. 4552.

2. Arbitration Procedural Code of the Russian Federation dated July 27, 2002. No. 95-FZ (adopted by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on June 14, 2002), (as amended on March 31, 2005) // SZ RF. 2002. No. 30. - St. 3012.

3. Federal Law of July 24, 2002. No. 96-FZ “On the implementation of the Arbitration Procedural Code of the Russian Federation” (adopted by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on June 21, 2002) // SZ RF. 2002: No. 30. - St. 3013.

4. Federal Law of December 10, 2003. No. 173-F3 “On currency regulation and currency control” (adopted by the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on November 21, 2003), (as amended on June 29, 2004) // SZ RF. 2003. No. 50. - St. 4859.

Regulatory acts of foreign countries

1. Per. with German; Scientific editors A.L. Makovsky and others - M.: Wolters Kluwer, 2004. - 816 p.

2. Uniform Commercial Code of the United States (Official text 1990.) // Uniform Commercial Code of the United States: Trans. from English/ Series Modern foreign and international private law. - M.: International Center for Financial and Economic Development, 1996. - 427 p.

3. The Civil Code of Georgia was adopted on June 26, 1997. Entered into force on November 25, 1997. (with amendments and modifications as of November 26, 2001.) // Civil Code of Georgia / Scientific. ed. Z.K. Bigwava. Introductory article by the Chairman of the Supreme Court

Practice of the courts of the Russian Federation

1. Ruling of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated August 17, 1999. No. CAS 99-199 // Bulletin of the RF Armed Forces. 2000. No. 10. - pp. 25-26.

Posted on Allbest.ru

Similar documents