In Art. 26 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation defined the limits of legal capacity of persons 14-18 years old. Minors can independently manage their income (earnings, scholarships). They can exercise the author’s rights to a work of literature, science, art, invention, or another product of their own intellectual labor. They are allowed to contribute to financial institutions. In addition, persons 14-18 years old can carry out small household transactions, the amount of which should not be higher than the limits established in the norms. They are provided for in paragraph 2 of Art. 28 of the Code.
When they reach 16 years of age, minors can become members of cooperatives, according to the legislation governing the activities of these associations. In order to carry out other legally significant actions, persons with limited legal capacity must obtain the written consent of their legal representatives. In accordance with Art. 26 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, persons 14-18 years of age are responsible for the actions taken by them in accordance with paragraphs 1 and 2. For the harm caused by them, the law provides for punishment.
Partial legal specificity
The lower limit of the age at which a person can make transactions in Russia is 6 years. In different countries, this threshold is different. For example, in Armenia, the Czech Republic, Uzbekistan, it is the same as in Russia. In Turkmenistan, Estonia, Azerbaijan - 7, and in Costa Rica - 15 years. Accordingly, to the specified limit, all legal actions of the child are the responsibility of the legal representatives - parents / guardians, adoptive parents.
Small household deal
The Civil Code of the Russian Federation provides for certain legal opportunities for persons 6-14 years old. These subjects have limited legal capacity and are called juvenile. Persons under six years old have no right to make transactions . The general procedure for the implementation of legal opportunities by minors is defined in Art. 28 of the Code. Clause 2 of the norm states that these entities may make transactions:
- Considered small household.
- Aimed at receiving gratuitous benefits and not requiring state registration or notarization.
- By order of funds provided by the legal representative or with his consent by a third party for certain purposes or free spending.
The Code does not directly define what a small household transaction is. This concept, however, is often used in judicial practice and legal publications. In the process of applying the category, its features were derived. First of all, the criterion by which a small household transaction is determined is the age of the subject. The material condition of the family as a whole does not matter. The second criterion is the purchase amount . 5 minimum wages are used as the maximum size (by analogy with Article 575 of the Code). The third criterion, which must be met by a small household transaction, is the absence of harm to the normal development and health of the child. In practice, other signs are also used. A minor can carry out various small household transactions. Examples : purchasing food, school supplies, toys, etc. from a store
Explanation
In Art. 28 shows the type of actions of minors aimed at gratuitous satisfaction of needs - obtaining benefits. Moreover, the law establishes certain requirements. First of all, transactions should not provide for state registration or notarization. For some contracts, these procedures are directly established by law. In particular, real estate transactions are subject to state registration. A donation contract is considered gratuitous. If an immovable is transferred, then registration is required. Donation of the vehicle is carried out without following this procedure. Vehicle registration is technical in nature and has accounting value. The right of ownership appears at the recipient in accordance with the contract at the time of transfer of transport. From this we can conclude that the child may well accept or give a car. However, the fact of independent conclusion of such an agreement by a minor is in doubt. Notarization is provided for in the agreement of the parties, while it may not be established by law for specific transactions. As for the ability to dispose of funds provided by the legal representative or a third party with his consent, they do not have much practical value. This circumstance is due to the fact that spending money in such cases can be carried out exclusively within small transactions.
Limitations
In other articles of the Code, as well as in a number of federal laws, the limits are established within which a small household transaction can be carried out . This , in particular, the above-mentioned Art. 575. Under paragraph 1 of this rule, donation is prohibited, except for ordinary gifts, the value of which is less than 3 thousand rubles, on behalf of minors by legal representatives. The ban on the implementation of such actions by minors themselves proceeds from the meaning of the norm.
Responsibility
It is provided for in paragraph 3 of Art. 28 of the Code. In some cases, meeting the needs of minors can be harmful. Responsibility for it lies with adults. The provisions of Art. 28 are specified in Art. 172, as well as Art. 1073 Code. In particular, a transaction is considered null and void, except for a minor one and the others provided for in clause 2 of Article 28, perfect face up to 14 liters. In this case, each party is obliged to return to the other everything that was received in kind. If this is not possible, then the participants will reimburse the cost of things in money. In addition, the legally capable party compensates for the real damage if it was or could have been aware of the legality of the other.
Nuances
In the interests of the minor, the transaction that he completed may be deemed valid. This is the case if the court finds that it was carried out to the benefit of a person with limited legal capacity. For legal harm inflicted by a minor, his legal representatives shall be liable if they do not prove that they are not guilty of causing damage.
Arbitrage practice
If the minor was placed in an organization for orphans and those without parental care, this institution should compensate for the harm that the child caused, if he does not prove, the absence of his own fault. If the damage was caused during the period when a citizen under 14 years old was under the temporary supervision of a medical, educational or other institution or a person who supervised him in accordance with the contract, these entities will be liable for it. The punishment will not be imputed only if these organizations prove that they are not guilty of the harm done.
In one of the determinations of the Supreme Court in the case on compensation of expenses for the purchase of medicines and non-pecuniary damage caused by a minor during his time at school, he noted that the educational institution was obliged to carry out proper supervision of the child. An educational institution could be exempted from liability for damage if it could prove the absence of its fault. Then the question of attracting parents would be raised. The Supreme Court ruled that the findings of a lower court, which placed the legal representatives of the child in responsibility to compensate for the harm, were unlawful. The first instance, in particular, indicated that the defendants (parents) could not prove the absence of their guilt in the improper upbringing of the child. Meanwhile, at the time of the onset of harm, the minor was under the supervision of a school. This, in turn, means that the responsibility lay with the institution.
Important point
The obligation of guardians, parents, adoptive parents, as well as medical, educational and other institutions to compensate for harm caused by a minor, does not stop when he reaches the age of majority or if he receives property sufficient to compensate for the damage. If the legal representatives have died or do not have the necessary amount of funds to pay off the claims, while the causer himself has become legally competent and has the necessary amount available, taking into account the property status of the parties, the court may partially or fully shift the corresponding obligation to the causer.
Recommendations
In judicial practice, proceedings in cases involving the making of unjustified purchases by children are quite common. In such situations, it’s far from always that even the sellers themselves are able to assess how much an action involving spending money meets the needs of a minor. Therefore, the responsibility to a greater extent in such cases is shifted to guardians, parents, adoptive parents. Due to the fact that a child at the age of six can already carry out a small household transaction, experts recommend that legal representatives control the amount of cash available to a minor. As a rule, pocket money is becoming the main source of funds. With each replenishment of savings, it is necessary to conduct conversations with the child regarding possible and allowable acquisitions. Shopping should not go beyond reason. As practice shows, a calm explanation of the situation can prevent many problems.
Conclusion
Currently, pocket money is the norm in many families. As a rule, their amount does not exceed reasonable limits. However, there are situations when the parent's bank cards are at the disposal of the minor. Such situations occur in case of insufficient supervision of children. A child under 14 does not always understand where the limit is allowed. Accordingly, he may, even not consciously, inflict substantial property damage on the family. Only adults can blame such a situation. However, sellers in stores should clearly assess the situation.