The concept of damages: deconstruction of their definition as a measure of responsibility

Abstract

The article makes a reasoned analysis of damages’ legal nature, provides arguments against the most common point of view in the academic and educational literature that damages are a measure of civil liability of a universal nature, which implies the establishment of the composition of a civil offense. The point of view that damages are unfavorable sanction for non-compliance with the obligation is criticized. An attempt is made to bring together damages as an economic category (negative balance as a result of summing up mutual claims of the parties to the legal relationship) and damages as a legal notion (damages as a way of civil law protection from negative property consequences of one of the parties based on existence of duty). The author adheres to a broader concept of risk distribution: negative consequences imposed on non-beneficiary of the victim’s estate may be based on not only defendant’s unlawful actions or inaction, but also on other grounds provided for by law, contract or principles of law, this makes it possible to expand the scope of application of this institution and explains the numerous examples of damages available in the legislation in the absence of an offense and grounds for the application of liability measures.

References

1. Afanas’ev, S. F. (2020). On the understanding of the institution of court costs and its relation to losses in the aspect of modern legal policy. Bulletin of the civil procedure, 6, pp. 30–41. (in Russ.).

2. Vasilevskaya, L. Y. (2018). Damages awards in Russian and Anglo-American Law: the difference of conceptual approaches. Russian Law Journal, 2, pp. 51–62. (in Russ.).

3. Zhuchenko, S. P. (2017). Damages: foreign approaches and domestic practice. In M. A., Rozhkova (Ed.) Protection of civil rights: selected aspects: Collection of articles. Moscow, pp. 104–161 (in Russ.).

4. Kovyazina, N. M. (2021). Damages as the most common measure of civil liability. Lawyer, 3, pp. 57–63. (in Russ.).

5. Monastyrskii, Y. E. (2017). The nature of damages claims. The law, 9, pp. 102–114. (in Russ.).

6. Karapetov, A. G. (Ed.). (2020). The main provisions of civil law: article-byarticle commentary to Articles 1–16.1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Moscow: (in Russ.).

7. Pitalenko, D. R. (2020). Differentiation of offset and balance theory: analysis of judicial practice. Information and analytical journal “Arbitration disputes”, 1, pp. 113–125. (in Russ.).

8. Usacheva, K.A. (2017). The effect of the fact of violation of the contract on determining the consequences of its termination. Bulletin of Economic Justice of the Russian Federation, 6, pp. 129–158. (in Russ.).

9. Calabresi, G. and Melamed, D. (1972). Property Rules, Liability Rules and Inalienability: One View of the Cathedral. Harvard Law Review, 85, pp. 1089–1128.

10. Koziol, H. (2012). Basic Questions of Tort Law from a Germanic Perspective. Wien.