Liability is a special legal term meaning, in a broad sense, an entity’s obligation to compensate for damage caused to another person. In the domestic legal system, this concept is used primarily in the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. Art. 243 of the Code establishes cases when full compensation is assigned to an employee. Consider them.
Cases of full liability
In part 1 of article 243, it is stipulated that the employee is obliged to compensate the damage caused to the employer in full if:
- According to the Labor Code or according to the provisions of other legal acts, an employee is assigned a corresponding duty.
- A shortage of values was revealed that were entrusted to the employee on the basis of a written contract or received under a one-time act.
- The damage was done intentionally.
- The harm arose as a result of a person being in a state of intoxication.
- There is a court decision establishing the criminality of the employee.
- Damage caused in connection with an administrative offense, if it is recorded by the relevant state structure.
- The harm arose as a result of the disclosure of information constituting a secret protected by law.
- Damage caused due to non-fulfillment by a person of his professional duties.
Full mat. liability may be provided for in an employment contract concluded with ch. accountant, deputy head of the company.
Article 243 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation: comments
The employee who caused damage to the employer in the process of fulfilling labor duties shall be held liable on the basis of the provisions of the current legislation. The obligation of full compensation for harm is established in various regulatory documents.
Article 277 of the Code (Part 1) provides that its head is responsible for the actual direct damage caused to the organization. Due to the fact that the liability is directly established by law, the prosecution of a person cannot be made conditional on the existence of a penalty on the contract.
68 article of the Federal Law No. 126 stipulates that telecom operators shall be liable for damage, loss of valuable items, or shortage of investments in the amount declared by the sender. In addition, employees are liable to their employer for delay, loss of telegraph / mail of all kinds, damage to investments that arose through their fault in the process of fulfilling their duties, to the extent that the operator is responsible to users of the services, unless another measure is fixed in relevant federal laws.
Lack of
The legislation provides for special agreements on liability . Such agreements are concluded with employees whose activities are directly related to the maintenance and use of commodity, monetary values or other valuable items.
The previous Labor Code provided for the full responsibility of the employee for the failure to ensure the safety of property and other valuables entrusted to storage or for other purposes.
In judicial practice, the approach was used, according to which the penalty was applied to persons with whom a contract of material liability was concluded, in case of damage or lack of values. Legislation in force today excludes liability for property damage. Full responsibility, therefore, is charged only with a shortage.
During the inventory , other verification activities, the calculation and comparison of the values available and indicated in the documentation are carried out. If the values do not match, the perpetrator is identified and held accountable. The act of deficiency in the inventory is the basis for imposing sanctions.
In addition, the employee may be liable for damages for the shortage of property issued to him on the basis of a one-time act. Due to the fact that the activity on the maintenance / use of values is not included in the list of his obligations under the employment contract, a one-time document may be issued solely with his consent.
Intent
In case of deliberate infliction of material damage, a citizen understands that his behavior is unlawful, assumes the onset of negative consequences, consciously allows them and wishes them to occur.
Such actions are recognized as a gross violation of the obligations stipulated by the contract. In this case, responsibility under paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Art. 243 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation will come if the employer can prove the intent of the perpetrator, as well as the relationship between his behavior and negative consequences.
Drunk
It is considered an aggravating factor. Intoxication can be caused through the use of alcohol, drugs, the use of other toxic substances.
As in the previous case, the employer can assign to the citizen the obligation to fully compensate the damage that has occurred if he proves that the damage was the result of the person being in this condition. Moreover, the form of guilt of the subject for the application of 4 paragraph 1 of the article. 243 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation will not matter.
Crime
As indicated in paragraph 5 of paragraph 1 of Article 243 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, the basis for the obligation to compensate for the damage in full is a court sentence that has entered into force. The absence of such a document, accordingly, excludes the application of a measure to a citizen, even if the damage is caused by clearly criminal acts.
For example, a person cannot be obligated to indemnify for the initiation of proceedings or during the production of procedural investigative actions against him. This approach is confirmed by the explanations of the Plenum of the Armed Forces in the resolution No. 52 of 3006.
Exceptions
The legislation provides for a number of circumstances, the presence of which precludes the involvement of a citizen in a full mat. responsibility. These include, in particular, the termination of the case at the stage of the preliminary investigation or in the framework of the trial, as well as non-rehabilitating factors. The latter, in particular, include the expiration of a statute of limitations, the publication of a decree on amnesty, etc. An unconditional basis excluding liability under Art. 243 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, the adoption of an acquittal decision is considered.
As explained by the Plenum of the Armed Forces, if a conviction has been passed against a person, but due to amnesty, the penalty is waived in whole or in part, the citizen may nevertheless be charged with the obligation to compensate the damage to the employer in full, since there is a action court ruling establishing the criminal conduct of the perpetrator.
In other cases, the inability to attract an employee in accordance with paragraph 5 of clause 1 of part 243 of the Article of the Code does not preclude the employer from claiming compensation for harm on other grounds.
Special cases
An employee may be involved in a full checkmate. liability for harm that has occurred to the employer with whom he is in a labor relationship, although the damage is not caused in connection with the performance of his professional duties.
It should be noted here that the time of occurrence of the damage does not matter. It may appear before, during, or after work. Examples include damage to the machine, on which the worker produces parts for his own needs, the breakdown of a company car, the operation of which was associated with personal need.
Conclusion
The list given in article 243 is recognized as exhaustive. It can not be expanded neither by agreement of the parties, nor by the local documents of the enterprise.
For 2 parts of the article provides a full mat. responsibility for the deputy head and ch. accountants of the organization, subject to the establishment of it in the employment contract. If the relevant clause is not provided for in the contract, in the absence of other grounds for holding a person liable, recovery may be carried out only within the framework of their average earnings.