Dmitry Uryakin told Pravo.ru about the position of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the application of the norm on unjustified enrichment

This week the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation will consider a case concerning the recovery of money transferred by oral agreement via Sberbank Online for the provision of a legal service relating to the re-registration of the designation of immovable property. Three lower courts ruled that the transfer was unjust enrichment, as the plaintiff retained the transaction receipt and the defendant had no evidence that the services had been rendered.

In the opinion of Dmitry Uryakin, Senior Associate, Head of General Business Practice at Maxima Legal, in this case the courts did not analyse whether the parties had contractual relations and did not provide a legal assessment of the plaintiff’s arguments. The expert reminded Pravo.ru that the highest court has already pointed out that if there is a contract between the parties, the rules on unjust enrichment cannot be applied. ‘The Supreme Court has repeatedly said that the rules on unjust enrichment should not be applied to a party’s claim for the return of what has been performed under a contract, if the contract itself or the obligations arising from it have not been terminated. In such a case, the provisions on unjust enrichment shall be applied, since the rules on the relevant contract and the contract itself do not provide otherwise’, Dmitry Uryakin emphasised. 

To read the full article (in Russian), please, see Pravo.ru website>>>