СПОСОБЫ  ВОЗМЕЩЕНИЯ  ИМУЩЕСТВЕННОГО  ВРЕДА,   ПРИЧИНЕННОГО  ГОСУДАРСТВУ

Ekaterina Vladimirovna MIKHAILOVA

doi:10.33184/pravgos-2026.2.11

Authors

Ekaterina Vladimirovna MIKHAILOVA Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33184/pravgos-2026.2.11

Keywords:

property damage, crime, state, civil law relationship, prosecutor’s claim, lost profits, illegal privatization, anti-corruption claims, public interest, statute of limitations, property confiscation, civil claim, criminal proceedings

Abstract

Property damage to a public law entity is often inflicted in the course of committing a crime. At the same time, there are significantly more instances of criminal prosecution for such a crime than there are claims for compensation for damage caused to the state by that crime. In this regard, an analysis of the methods of compensating for property damage caused to the state becomes pertinent. Given that the Russian Federation, its constituent entities, and municipalities are subjects of civil law, the author believes that the methods of restoring their civil rights and legitimate interests should be guaranteed to the same extent as they are guaranteed to individuals and legal entities. Purpose: to substantiate the capacity of public law entities to act as victims in criminal proceedings and to claim compensation for property damage arising from crimes. Methods: analysis (the legal status of the state as a participant in public law and private law relations is analyzed); comparison (civil liability and criminal liability for damage caused to the state by a crime are compared); based on the necessity of compensating for any unlawful actions against the state, a deduction is made regarding the feasibility of such compensation, including in connection with illegal privatization. Results: the author asserts that property damage to the state can be caused both through criminal acts and through civil law violations of obligations arising from agreements in which a public law entity is a party. Criminal law liability measures, including property confiscation, do not exempt the perpetrator from the obligation to compensate the state for property damage, including lost profits. The protection of the state’s property interests as a participant in civil law relations should be pursued on the basis of common grounds for damage compensation, but with additional guarantees for real restoration of rights, as the state, its subjects, and municipalities perform public functions while engaging in civil circulation.

Author Biography

Ekaterina Vladimirovna MIKHAILOVA , Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Doctor of Law, Associate Professor, Acting Head of the Procedural Law Sector, Chief Researcher

References

Михайлова Е.В. О порядке взыскания имущественного ущерба, причиненного государству совершением преступления / Е.В. Михайлова // Уголовное судопроизводство. – 2025. – № 4. – С. 43–46.

Ларина Л.Ю. Государство как субъект уголовно-правовых отношений / Л.Ю. Ларина // Юридическая наука. – 2017. – № 3. – С. 130–134.

Суханов Е.А. Гражданский кодекс в поиске баланса частных и публичных интересов / Е.А. Суханов // Вестник Московского университета. Серия 11: Право. – 2019. – № 6. – С. 3–12.

Манукян А.Р. Концепция правосубъектности государства в гражданских правоотношениях / А.Р. Манукян, Е.А. Кириллова // Проблемы экономики и юридической практики. – 2017. – № 5. – С. 94–98.

Бочкарев С.А. Институт исковой давности как несбывшаяся надежда коррупционеров / С.А. Бочкарев // Журнал российского права. – 2025. – № 4. – С. 104–121.