Theory of everything. Civil Code of the Russian Federation (Civil Code of the Russian Federation) 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation comments

1. A citizen has the right to demand in court a refutation of information discrediting his honor, dignity or business reputation, if the person who disseminated such information does not prove that it is true. The refutation must be made in the same way that information about the citizen was disseminated, or in another similar way.

At the request of interested persons, the protection of the honor, dignity and business reputation of a citizen is allowed even after his death.

2. Information discrediting the honor, dignity or business reputation of a citizen and disseminated in the media mass media, must be refuted in the same media. A citizen in respect of whom the said information is disseminated in the mass media has the right to demand, along with a refutation, also the publication of his answer in the same mass media.

3. If information discrediting the honor, dignity or business reputation of a citizen is contained in a document emanating from an organization, such a document is subject to replacement or revocation.

4. In cases where information discrediting the honor, dignity or business reputation of a citizen has become widely known and in connection with this the refutation cannot be brought to public attention, the citizen has the right to demand the removal of the relevant information, as well as the suppression or prohibition of the further dissemination of the specified information by withdrawing and destruction, without any compensation, of copies of material carriers made for the purpose of putting into civil circulation containing the specified information, if without the destruction of such copies of material carriers, the removal of the relevant information is impossible.

5. If information that discredits the honor, dignity or business reputation of a citizen becomes available on the Internet after their dissemination, the citizen has the right to demand the removal of the relevant information, as well as the refutation of the specified information in a way that ensures that the refutation is brought to the attention of Internet users.

6. The procedure for refuting information discrediting the honor, dignity or business reputation of a citizen, in other cases, except for those specified in paragraphs 2-5 of this article, is established by the court.

7. The application to the violator of measures of responsibility for non-execution of a court decision does not relieve him of the obligation to perform the action provided for by the court decision.

8. If it is impossible to identify the person who has disseminated information discrediting the honor, dignity or business reputation of a citizen, the citizen in respect of whom such information has been disseminated has the right to apply to the court for recognition of the disseminated information as untrue.

9. A citizen in respect of whom information is disseminated that discredits his honor, dignity or business reputation, along with the refutation of such information or the publication of his answer, has the right to demand compensation for losses and compensation for moral damage caused by the dissemination of such information.

10. The rules of paragraphs 1 - 9 of this article, with the exception of the provisions on compensation for moral damage, may also be applied by the court to cases of dissemination of any information about a citizen that does not correspond to reality, if such a citizen proves that the indicated information does not correspond to reality. The limitation period for claims made in connection with the dissemination of the said information in the mass media is one year from the date of publication of such information in the relevant mass media.

11. The rules of this article on the protection of the business reputation of a citizen, with the exception of the provisions on compensation for moral damage, respectively, apply to the protection of the business reputation of a legal entity.

Expert comment:

In the legal field, Art. 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation occupies a unique place, since it is based mainly on subjective factors. Its norms are aimed at protecting honor and dignity, and each plaintiff is free to put forward his own versions of what, from his point of view, harms them.

Comments to Art. 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation

1. Honor, dignity, business reputation are close moral categories. Honor and dignity reflect an objective assessment of a citizen by others and his self-esteem. Business reputation is an assessment professional qualities citizen or legal entity.

Honor, dignity, business reputation of a citizen in the aggregate determine the "good name", the inviolability of which is guaranteed by the Constitution (Article 23).

2. To protect the honor, dignity, business reputation of a citizen, a special method is provided: refutation of widespread discrediting information. This method can be used if there is a combination of three conditions.

First, the information must be damaging. The assessment of information as discrediting is based not on a subjective, but on an objective sign. Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of August 18, 1992 N 11 "On Certain Issues Arising in Courts Considering Cases on the Protection of the Honor and Dignity of Citizens, as well as the Business Reputation of Citizens and Legal Entities" specifically notes that "discrediting is information that does not correspond to reality, containing allegations of a violation by a citizen or organization of the current legislation or moral principles (of committing a dishonest act, improper behavior in work collective, everyday life and other information discrediting the production, economic and social activities, business reputation, etc.), which detract from honor and dignity."

Secondly, information must be disseminated. The aforementioned Decree of the Plenum of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation also clarifies what should be understood by the dissemination of information: "The publication of such information in the press, broadcast on radio and television programs, demonstration in newsreel programs and other mass media (media), presentation in official characteristics, public speaking, statements addressed officials, or communication in a different, including oral, form to several or at least one person. "It is specially emphasized that the communication of information to the person they concern is not considered as distribution in private.

Thirdly, the information must not be true. At the same time, the commented article enshrines the principle of the presumption of innocence of the victim inherent in civil law: information is considered untrue until the person who disseminated it proves the opposite (see Bulletin of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. 1995. N 7. P. 6).

3. For the protection of the honor, dignity and business reputation of the deceased, see comments. to Art. 150 GK.

4. In paragraph 2 of the commented article, the procedure for refuting discrediting information that was circulated in the media is specially highlighted. It is regulated in more detail in the Law of the Russian Federation of December 27, 1991 "On the Mass Media" (Vedomosti RF. 1992. N 7. Art. 300). In addition to the requirement that the refutation must be placed in the same media in which the defamatory information was disseminated, the Law established that it must be typed in the same font, in the same place on the page. If a refutation is given on radio or television, it must be broadcast at the same time of day and, as a rule, in the same program as the refuted message (Articles 43, 44 of the Law).

In the commented article, the procedure for refuting the information contained in the document is specially highlighted - such a document is subject to replacement. It could be a replacement work book, which contains a discrediting entry about the dismissal of an employee, characteristics, etc.

Although in all other cases the order of refutation is established by the court, it follows from the meaning of the commented article that it must be made in the same way that the defamatory information was disseminated. This is the position taken by arbitrage practice.

5. From paragraph 2 of the commented article it follows that in all cases of infringement on honor, dignity and business reputation, a citizen is provided judicial protection. Therefore, the rule established by the Mass Media Law, according to which the victim must first apply to the media with a request for refutation, cannot be considered as mandatory.

Special permission on this issue is contained in the Decree of the Plenum of the RF Armed Forces dated August 18, 1992 N 11. It notes that "clauses 1 and 7 of article 152 of the first part of the Civil Code Russian Federation It was established that a citizen has the right to demand in court a refutation of information discrediting his honor, dignity or business reputation, and a legal entity - information discrediting his business reputation. At the same time, the law does not provide for the obligatory preliminary filing of such a demand with the defendant, including in the case when the claim is brought against the mass media that disseminated the above information.

6. Paragraph 3 of the commented article establishes the procedure for protecting the honor, dignity and business reputation of a citizen in the event that information is disseminated in the media that is devoid of signs that give the right to refute it. It can be, for example, discrediting, but true information, or not discrediting information that does not correspond to reality, but at the same time, their distribution infringes on the rights and legitimate interests of a citizen, detracts from his business reputation. In these cases, the citizen has the right not to a refutation, but to an answer, which must be placed in the same media. Although such a method of protection as the publication of a response is established only in relation to the media, it is possible that it can also be used when disseminating information in a different way.

Failure to comply with these court decisions is punishable by a fine in accordance with Art. 406 Code of Civil Procedure and art. 206 APC in the amount of up to 200 established by law minimum dimensions wages.

7. Special methods of protection - giving a refutation or answer are applied regardless of the fault of the persons who allowed the dissemination of such information.

Paragraph 5 of the commented article confirms the possibility of using, in addition to special and general methods of protection, to protect honor, dignity and business reputation. At the same time, the most common ones are named: compensation for damages and compensation for moral harm. Property and non-property damage resulting from a violation of honor, dignity and business reputation is subject to compensation in accordance with the norms contained in Ch. 59 of the Civil Code (obligation due to harm). In accordance with these norms, compensation for property damage (losses) is possible only in case of guilty dissemination of information (Article 1064 of the Civil Code), and compensation for moral damage - regardless of guilt (Article 1100 of the Civil Code).

In addition to those mentioned, any other general methods of protection can be used (see the commentary to Article 12 of the Civil Code), in particular, the suppression of actions that violate the right or threaten to violate it (confiscation of the circulation of a newspaper, magazine, book, prohibition of the publication of a second edition etc.).

8. Clause 6 contains one more special way of protecting the honor, dignity and business reputation of citizens in the case of anonymous dissemination of information: recognition by the court of the disseminated information as untrue. The Code of Civil Procedure does not establish the procedure for considering such requirements. Obviously, they should be considered in the order of special proceedings provided for the establishment of facts of legal significance (Chapters 26, 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure). The same procedure, obviously, can be used if there is no distributor (death of a citizen or liquidation of a legal entity).

The cases of anonymous dissemination of information do not include publications in the media without indicating their author. In these cases, there is always a distributor, and therefore, responsible person this media is speaking.

9. In the event of a violation of the business reputation of a legal entity, it has the right to demand a refutation of the widespread discrediting information, replacement of the issued document, publication of a response in the media, establishment of the fact that the disseminated information does not correspond to reality, etc. Entity entitled to claim damages. With regard to non-pecuniary damage, it is in accordance with Art. 151 of the Civil Code is compensated only to citizens, since only they can undergo moral and physical suffering.

Do you think you are Russian? Born in the USSR and think that you are Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian? No. This is not true.

You are actually Russian, Ukrainian or Belarusian. But you think you are a Jew.

Game? Wrong word. The correct word is "imprinting".

A newborn associates himself with those facial features that he observes immediately after birth. This natural mechanism is characteristic of most living beings with vision.

Newborns in the USSR for the first few days saw their mother for a minimum of feeding time, and most of the time they saw the faces of the maternity hospital staff. By a strange coincidence, they were (and still are) mostly Jewish. Reception is wild in its essence and effectiveness.

All your childhood you wondered why you live surrounded by non-native people. Rare Jews on your path could do anything with you, because you were drawn to them, while others were repelled. Yes, even now they can.

You cannot fix this - imprinting is one-time and for life. It is difficult to understand, the instinct took shape when you were still very far from being able to formulate. From that moment, no words or details have been preserved. Only facial features remained in the depths of memory. Those traits that you consider your family.

3 comments

System and Observer

Let us define a system as an object whose existence is not in doubt.

An observer of a system is an object that is not a part of the system it observes, that is, it determines its existence, including through factors independent of the system.

From the point of view of the system, the observer is a source of chaos - both control actions and the consequences of observational measurements that do not have a causal relationship with the system.

An internal observer is a potentially achievable object for the system in relation to which the inversion of the observation and control channels is possible.

An external observer is even an object potentially unattainable for the system, located beyond the event horizon of the system (spatial and temporal).

Hypothesis #1. All-seeing eye

Let's assume that our universe is a system and it has an external observer. Then observational measurements can take place, for example, with the help of "gravitational radiation" penetrating the universe from all sides from the outside. The capture cross section of "gravitational radiation" is proportional to the mass of the object, and the projection of the "shadow" from this capture onto another object is perceived as an attractive force. It will be proportional to the product of the masses of objects and inversely proportional to the distance between them, which determines the density of the "shadow".

The capture of "gravitational radiation" by an object increases its randomness and is perceived by us as a passage of time. An object that is opaque to "gravitational radiation", the capture cross section of which is larger than the geometric size, inside the universe looks like a black hole.

Hypothesis #2. Internal Observer

It is possible that our universe is watching itself. For example, using pairs of quantum entangled particles spaced apart in space as standards. Then the space between them is saturated with the probability of the existence of the process that generated these particles, which reaches its maximum density at the intersection of the trajectories of these particles. The existence of these particles also means the absence of a sufficiently large capture cross section on the trajectories of objects capable of absorbing these particles. The remaining assumptions remain the same as for the first hypothesis, except:

Time flow

External observation of an object approaching the event horizon of a black hole, if the determining factor of time in the universe is an "outside observer", will slow down exactly twice - the shadow from the black hole will block exactly half of the possible trajectories of "gravitational radiation". If the determining factor is the “internal observer”, then the shadow will block the entire trajectory of interaction and the flow of time for an object falling into a black hole will completely stop for a view from the outside.

Also, the possibility of combining these hypotheses in one proportion or another is not excluded.

At the request of interested persons, the protection of the honor, dignity and business reputation of a citizen is allowed even after his death.

2. Information discrediting the honor, dignity or business reputation of a citizen and disseminated in the media must be refuted in the same media. A citizen in respect of whom the said information is disseminated in the mass media has the right to demand, along with a refutation, also the publication of his answer in the same mass media.

7. The application to the violator of measures of responsibility for non-execution of a court decision does not relieve him of the obligation to perform the action provided for by the court decision.

10. The rules of paragraphs 1-9 of this article, with the exception of the provisions on compensation for moral damage, may also be applied by the court to cases of dissemination of any information about a citizen that does not correspond to reality, if such a citizen proves that the indicated information does not correspond to reality. The limitation period for claims made in connection with the dissemination of the said information in the mass media is one year from the date of publication of such information in the relevant mass media.

(Article in the wording put into effect on October 1, 2013 federal law dated July 2, 2013 N 142-FZ.

Commentary on Article 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation

Honor, dignity, business reputation of a citizen together determine a good name, the inviolability of which is guaranteed by the Constitution (Article 23).

2. To protect the honor, dignity, business reputation of a citizen, a special method is provided - the refutation of widespread discrediting information. This method can be used if there is a combination of three conditions.

First, the information must be damaging. The assessment of information as discrediting is based not on a subjective, but on an objective sign. In the Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of August 18, 1992 N 11 "On some issues that have arisen in the consideration by the courts of cases on the protection of the honor and dignity of citizens, as well as the business reputation of citizens and legal entities," it is specifically noted that "discrediting is information that does not correspond to reality, containing statements about a violation by a citizen or organization of the current legislation or moral principles (about committing a dishonest act, improper behavior in the workforce, everyday life and other information that discredits production, economic and social activities, business reputation, etc.), which detracts from honor and dignity " .

Secondly, information must be disseminated. The aforementioned Decree of the Plenum of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation also clarifies what should be understood as the dissemination of information: ". publication of such information in the press, broadcast on radio and television programs, demonstration in newsreel programs and other media, presentation in official characteristics, public speeches, statements addressed to officials, or a message in any other form, including oral, to several or at least one person. It is specially emphasized that the communication of information to the person to whom they relate, in private, cannot be recognized as their dissemination.

3. For the protection of the honor, dignity and business reputation of the deceased, see comments. to Art. 150.

4. Requirements for the protection of the honor and dignity of citizens, as well as the business reputation of citizens and legal entities are considered by courts of general jurisdiction and arbitration courts in accordance with the general rules on their jurisdiction.

Thus, claims of a legal entity against the media to refute information discrediting the business reputation of a legal entity are not subject to consideration in an arbitration court if the published information has an author. A case on the protection of the business reputation of a legal entity is outside the jurisdiction of the arbitration court if it arose from relations not related to economic activity the plaintiff (see Review of the practice of resolving disputes by arbitration courts related to the protection of business reputation - information letter of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation of September 23, 1999 N 46 - Bulletin of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation, 1999, N 11, p. 62).

5. In accordance with the procedure established by the commented article, claims for the refutation of information contained in court decisions and sentences, decisions of the preliminary investigation bodies and other official documents, for which the law provides for a different procedure, cannot be considered (paragraph 3 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation dated 18.08.92 No. 11).

6. In paragraph 2 of the commented article, the procedure for refuting discrediting information that was circulated in the media is specially highlighted. It is regulated in more detail in the Mass Media Law. In addition to the requirement that the refutation must be placed in the same media in which the defamatory information was disseminated, the Law established that it must be typed in the same font, in the same place on the page. If a refutation is given on radio or television, it must be broadcast at the same time of day and, as a rule, in the same program as the refuted message (Articles 43, 44 of the Law).

In the commented article, the procedure for refuting the information contained in the document is specially highlighted - such a document is subject to replacement. We can talk about replacing a work book, which contains a discrediting entry about the dismissal of an employee, characteristics, etc.

7. From paragraph 2 of the commented article it follows that in all cases of infringement on honor, dignity and business reputation, a citizen is provided with judicial protection. Therefore, the rule established by the Mass Media Law, according to which the victim must first apply to the media with a request for refutation, cannot be considered as mandatory.

A special clarification on this issue is contained in the Decree of the Plenum of the RF Armed Forces of August 18, 1992 N 11. It notes that “clauses 1 and 7 of article 152 of the first part of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation establish that a citizen has the right to demand in court a refutation of discrediting his honor, dignity or business reputation of information, and a legal entity - information discrediting its business reputation.At the same time, the law does not provide for the mandatory preliminary filing of such a requirement with the defendant, including in the case when a claim is filed against the mass media that disseminated the above information ".

A similar explanation is contained in the information letter of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated September 23, 1999 N 46.

8. Paragraph 3 of the commented article establishes the procedure for protecting the honor, dignity and business reputation of a citizen in the event that information is disseminated in the media that is devoid of signs that give the right to refute it. We can talk, for example, about discrediting, but corresponding to reality information or about non-defamatory information that does not correspond to reality, if their distribution infringes on the rights and legitimate interests of a citizen to some extent, detracts from his business reputation. In these cases, the citizen has the right not to a refutation, but to an answer, which must be placed in the same media. Although such a method of protection as the publication of a response is established only in relation to the media, it is possible that it can also be used when disseminating information in a different way.

Special methods of protection - giving a refutation or answer - are applied regardless of the fault of the persons who disseminated such information.

9. By a court decision on the protection of the honor and dignity of citizens, as well as the business reputation of citizens and legal entities, the defendant undertakes to perform certain actions. In accordance with Art. 206 of the Code of Civil Procedure (paragraph 2), the court establishes in the decision the period during which the court decision must be executed. If the respondent fails to comply without good reasons court-ordered actions, a fine is imposed on him. The procedure for imposing a fine and its amount are determined by the Law on Enforcement Proceedings. In addition to the fine, the amount of which is set to 200 minimum wages and which, under certain conditions, increases, the defendant may be held administratively or criminally liable (Article 85 of the said Law).

10. Paragraph 5 of the commented article confirms the possibility of using, in addition to special, general methods of protection to protect honor, dignity and business reputation. At the same time, the most common ones are named: compensation for damages and compensation for moral harm. Property and non-property damage resulting from the derogation of honor, dignity and business reputation is subject to compensation in accordance with the norms contained in Ch. 59 of the Civil Code ("Obligations as a result of causing harm"). In accordance with these norms, compensation for property damage (losses) is possible only in case of guilty dissemination of information (Article 1064 of the Civil Code), and compensation for moral damage - regardless of guilt (Article 1100 of the Civil Code). At the same time, claims for damages or compensation for non-pecuniary damage may be considered by the court both along with claims for refutation of widespread information, and in the absence of such claims. In the latter case, the court examines the issue of the correspondence of such information to reality and makes an appropriate decision regarding the claimed losses (information letter of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated September 23, 1999 N 46).

In addition to those mentioned, other general methods of protection can be used (see the commentary to Article 12), in particular, the suppression of actions that violate the right or threaten to violate it (confiscation of the circulation of a newspaper, magazine, book, prohibition of the publication of a second edition, etc.). P.).

11. Clause 6 contains one more special way of protecting the honor, dignity and business reputation of citizens in the case of anonymous dissemination of information - recognition by the court of the disseminated information as untrue. The Code of Civil Procedure does not establish the procedure for considering such requirements. Obviously, they should be considered in the order of special proceedings provided for the establishment of facts of legal significance (Chapters 27, 28 of the Code of Civil Procedure). The same procedure, apparently, can be used if there is no distributor (death of a citizen or liquidation of a legal entity).

Anonymous dissemination of information does not include publications in the media without indicating their author. In these cases, there is always a distributor, and therefore, this media outlet is the responsible person.

12. In case of violation of the business reputation of a legal entity, it has the right to demand a refutation of the widespread discrediting information, replacement of the issued document, publication of a response in the media, establishment of the fact that the disseminated information does not correspond to reality, etc. The legal entity has the right to demand compensation for losses. As for compensation for moral damage, in the Civil Code (Articles 151, 1099 - 1101), as well as in the Law on the Mass Media, this issue is settled positively only in relation to citizens. The indication in paragraph 7 of the commented article that the rules on protecting the business reputation of a citizen are accordingly applied to the protection of the business reputation of a legal entity means that we are talking only about those rules, the application of which corresponds to the nature of legal entities. At the same time, it is unlikely that a legal entity as such can experience "physical and moral suffering".

It should be noted that the positions of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on this issue are different. The Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation believes that a legal entity is not entitled to compensation for non-pecuniary damage (Bulletin of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation, 1998, N 6, p. 43; see also: Sarbash S.V. Arbitration practice in civil cases. M .: Statut, 2003. P. 178), and the RF Armed Forces allow such a possibility (Resolution of the Plenum of the RF Armed Forces dated December 20, 1994 N 10).

Another commentary on Article 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation

1. The concepts of "honor", "dignity", "reputation" essentially coincide, determining the moral status of the individual, his self-esteem and position in society. Dignity and the right to protect one's good name are recognized for every person and are protected by the state as the highest values (Art. 2, 21, 23 of the Constitution). Business reputation characterizes a citizen as an employee, is an assessment of his professional qualities that are significant for being in demand in the labor market.

To disseminate defamatory information means to communicate it to a wide audience, to several or at least one person. The message can be public or private, made in written or oral form, using the media, as well as by image (drawing, photomontage).

The communication of information discrediting honor, dignity and business reputation to the person to whom they relate is not recognized as dissemination.

In the manner determined by the commented article, claims for the refutation of information contained in court decisions and sentences, decisions of the preliminary investigation bodies and other official documents, for which an appeal is provided for by another procedure established by laws, cannot be considered.

2. The honor and dignity of a citizen is also protected by the criminal law, which provides for liability for slander and insult (Articles 129, 130 of the Criminal Code). Slander and insult are crimes committed with direct intent. If the victim believes that information dishonoring him was deliberately disseminated, he has the right to apply to the court with a complaint about bringing the perpetrator to criminal liability. Simultaneous consideration of a criminal case and resolution of a claim under Art. 152 of the Civil Code is unacceptable. However, the refusal to initiate or terminate a criminal case, the issuance of a verdict (both guilty and acquittal) does not prevent the consideration of a claim for the protection of honor and dignity in civil proceedings.

3. Discrediting information detracts from the honor, dignity and business reputation of a citizen in public opinion or opinion individuals. The objective criteria for the recognition by the court of the discrediting nature of the disseminated information are the current legal norms, the principles of universal and professional morality, and business customs.

Discrediting allegations of violations of these norms and principles are usually reports of a citizen committing specific unworthy acts, the so-called judgments of fact. Estimates (opinions, interpretations) should be distinguished from factual judgments. Evaluation does not state a fact, but expresses a person's attitude to an object or its individual features ("good - bad", "good - evil", "worst - best", "attractive - repulsive", etc.). Therefore, the characteristics of truth - falsity are not applicable to estimates. At the same time, it should be taken into account that in addition to distinct descriptive and evaluative judgments, the language has a wide layer of evaluative expressions with actual reference, i.e. words that give a specific description, containing statements in the form of an assessment ("criminal", "dishonest", "deceitful", "incompetent", "optional", etc.). The validity of such statements can be verified; if not proven, they are subject to refutation. In any case, regardless of the degree of specification, political and ideological assessments cannot be recognized as discrediting; critical remarks on a scientific work or concept; ethically and business-neutral information about character traits, illnesses, physical disabilities.

4. The commented article protects the honor, dignity and business reputation only on the condition that the discrediting information is not true. Therefore, insulting expressions and comparisons that cannot be verified for truth are not subject to refutation. Claims to the form of presentation of the material, style of presentation, artistic techniques used by the author of the publication cannot be the subject of a claim under the commented article. Not only statements, but also assumptions (versions) can be checked for evidence. By general rule presumptive statements are not refuted in court, because they do not state facts. But in cases where assumptions (suspicions) are based on facts, the falsity of which was established in a court session, they are subject to refutation along with these facts, because they give them a discrediting color (the facts themselves, separately, not united by suspicion, can be neutral in legal and moral attitude). When referring to cases, rumors, rumors, it is necessary to prove that the rumors really took place, and the sources existed. Otherwise, information about rumors and sources is subject to refutation. To determine the nature of the disseminated information, the judge must take into account the purpose and genre of publication, the context in which the disputed word or phrase is used.

5. A claim for the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation has the right to present capable citizens who consider that discrediting and untrue information has been spread about them. For the protection of the honor and dignity of minors and incapacitated persons, their legal representatives may apply to the court. The commented article makes it possible to protect the good name of a citizen even after his death. Those interested in this can be both citizens (relatives, heirs, co-authors) and legal entities (for example, an organization headed by the deceased).

6. Defendants in cases of protection of honor, dignity and business reputation are persons who have disseminated defamatory information. Mandatory complicity arises in lawsuits containing demands to refute information disseminated in the media: the author and the editorial office of the relevant media are involved as defendants. If, when considering such information, the name of the author is not indicated or he used a pseudonym, one editorial board is responsible for the claim.

If the editorial office of the media outlet is not a legal entity, the founder of this media outlet is involved as a defendant in the case. However, even without being a legal entity, the editorial office is the proper defendant in all lawsuits containing demands for the refutation of discrediting information in the media.

The Law of the Russian Federation "On Mass Media" establishes the principle of media independence. In accordance with Art. 18 of this Law, according to the general rule, "the founder has no right to interfere in the activities of the mass media." Therefore, the court decision obliging to publish (read out on radio and television) a refutation should be addressed directly to the media outlet participating in the case as a co-defendant. Otherwise, the decision will not actually be implemented. If the claim is satisfied, the founder may be held liable in the form of compensation for losses and moral damage.

7. Rebuttal - special measure protection applied in case of violation of honor, dignity and business reputation. The duty of refutation rests with the distributor of discrediting and untrue information, regardless of his guilt. Yes, Art. 57 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On the Mass Media" establishes the grounds for exemption from liability of the editorial board, editor-in-chief, journalist for the dissemination of information that discredits honor and dignity and does not correspond to reality. But the duty of refutation (in the form of a notification of a court decision) is assigned by the court to the editorial office of the media in these cases, too, since the very fact of violation of the right serves as the basis for special protection measures. claim under Art. 152 of the Civil Code can be brought against several media outlets that have disseminated the same defamatory information. All defendants will be obliged to refute this information, and the responsibility will lie with the editorial office of the media in which such information was originally distributed, or the citizens and organizations from which they were received.

The procedure for refutation in the media is regulated in detail by Art. Art. 43, 44 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On the Mass Media": the refutation must be typed in the same font and placed under the heading "Refutation" in the same place on the page as the message being refuted.

A special procedure is provided by law for the refutation of the information contained in the document: it must be replaced or revoked. In other cases, the procedure for refutation is established by the court, depending on the method of dissemination of discrediting information. The obligation often imposed by the court on the defendant "to apologize to the plaintiff" does not correspond to the law. The refutation consists in reporting a discrepancy with reality, and not in asking for forgiveness.

8. The commented article establishes the right of a citizen to respond to the media that has published information that infringes on his rights or legitimate interests. Such information may be distortions of the biography or labor activity a citizen or information that, although true, is associated with an invasion of privacy, discloses personal or family secrets.

In accordance with the Law of the Russian Federation "On the Mass Media", a citizen has the right to apply to the court with a request to publish a response if the editors of the media refused to publish it. This Law also provides for the right of a citizen whose honor and dignity have been discredited by the dissemination of information that does not correspond to reality, to demand a refutation from the editorial office, and to appeal against the refusal or violation of the refutation procedure in court. This norm was also fixed in paragraph 4 of Art. 7 Fundamentals of civil law. It is missing from the commented article.

Claims against the media for the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation are brought directly to the court. Preliminary application for the publication of a refutation to the editorial office of the media does not affect the legal nature of the subsequent requirement for a refutation in court of discrediting and untrue information. Judicial protection of honor, dignity and business reputation in all cases is carried out in the form of a lawsuit, and not an appeal against the refusal of the media editorial office to refute.

9. Compensation for harm caused by the dissemination of information that discredits honor, dignity or business reputation is carried out according to the standards contained in Ch. 59 of the Civil Code "Obligations as a result of harm". Property damage (losses) is compensated in the presence of guilt (Article 1064), moral damage is compensated regardless of guilt (Article 1100).

In cases involving lawsuits against the media, the amount of compensation depends mainly on the nature and content of the defamatory information and the extent of its dissemination. The Law of the Russian Federation "On the Mass Media" (Article 57) provides a list of circumstances that relieve the editorial office and the journalist from the obligation to verify the accuracy of the information they report and, therefore, exclude their responsibility for the dissemination of discrediting and unreliable information.

A claim for compensation for non-pecuniary damage can be filed independently if the editorial board of the media voluntarily gave a refutation that satisfies the plaintiff. The transformation of a claim for the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation into a claim for compensation for moral damage, however, is unacceptable if you disagree with the refutation of the author of the published material.

10. By virtue of clause 7 of the commented article, the business reputation of a legal entity is protected according to the same rules as the business reputation of a citizen. A legal entity has the right to demand a refutation in court, has the right to publish its response in the media, etc. At the request of interested parties (for example, assignees), it is allowed to protect the business reputation of a legal entity after its liquidation.

At the same time, it should be taken into account that, unlike honor and dignity (good name), there is no mention of goodwill in the Constitution and appears only as a category civil law. In the civil law sense, this concept is applicable only to legal entities participating in entrepreneurial activity, business turnover. The Civil Code refers to "customs of business" (Article 5), " business relations parties" (art. 438), " business relations"(Article 1042). Civil law does not apply to relations based on imperious subordination (Article 2). State and municipal bodies exercising power and managerial functions are not carriers of business reputation and are not entitled to demand its judicial protection. Subjects civil law in accordance with Article 124 of the Civil Code, the state (its bodies) and municipalities become only when they act as equal participants in civil, business turnover.

The Civil Code did not speak clearly enough on the issue of compensation for moral damage to a discredited legal entity, and this vagueness was inherited from the previous civil legislation. Clause 7 of the commented article, extending to the protection of the business reputation of a legal entity all the rules on protecting the business reputation of a citizen without any exceptions (the adverb "respectively" means "equally", "equally", "also"), in fact, repeats paragraph 6 of Art. 7 of the Fundamentals of Civil Legislation, which provided for the right of a legal entity to compensation for non-pecuniary damage in an even more specific edition. On the other hand, Art. 151 of the Civil Code, as before Art. 131 of the Fundamentals of Civil Legislation, defines moral harm as physical or moral suffering and enshrines the right to compensation only for a citizen.

The Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in Decree No. 10, dedicated to the application of legislation on compensation for moral damage, resolved such a conflict in favor of a special rule, explaining that a defiled legal entity is entitled to such compensation. The Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation took a different position, reasonably reasoning that a legal entity, unlike physical suffering, cannot endure. As a result, a paradoxical situation has arisen: legal entities suffer in the courts of general jurisdiction, receiving compensation for their suffering, but do not experience suffering in arbitration courts.

The clarification of the Plenum of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, of course, does not agree with the definition of moral harm given in the Civil Code as physical and moral suffering, which only a living person is capable of experiencing. But there is no doubt that the business reputation of a legal entity is often harmed, not associated with direct losses. Civil law should provide for the right of a legal entity to compensation for reputational damage, giving it an independent definition, different from the concept of moral damage caused to a citizen.

11. The limitation period does not apply to the requirement to refute information that discredits honor, dignity and business reputation.

The claim for damages and compensation for non-pecuniary damage caused by the dissemination of discrediting and untrue information falls under the general limitation period of 3 years.

12. It is the plaintiff's responsibility to prove the fact of dissemination of information and substantiate their discrediting nature. The defendant must prove that the information is true.

13. The structure of the commented article does not allow protecting a citizen from defamation, i.e. dissemination of discrediting his real information. However, in our opinion, Art. 23 of the Constitution, which establishes the right to privacy, personal and family secrets, gives the right to a citizen in accordance with Art. 151 of the Civil Code to demand compensation for moral damage caused to him by defamation. It seems that liability should not arise if information about private life is of public importance (for example, information about diseases or vices of high-ranking officials or politicians that prevent them from properly performing their professional duties).

At the request of interested persons, the protection of the honor, dignity and business reputation of a citizen is allowed even after his death.

7. The application to the violator of measures of responsibility for non-execution of a court decision does not relieve him of the obligation to perform the action provided for by the court decision.

Return to document table of contents: Civil Code of the Russian Federation Part 1 in the current edition

Comments on Article 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, judicial practice of application

Clarifications of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation:

defamatory information

Discrediting, in particular, are information containing allegations of a violation by a citizen or legal entity of the current legislation, committing a dishonest act, incorrect, unethical behavior in personal, public or political life, bad faith in the implementation of production, economic and entrepreneurial activities, violation business ethics or business practices that detract from the honor and dignity of a citizen or the business reputation of a citizen or legal entity.

What is meant by dissemination of defamatory information?

The dissemination of information discrediting the honor and dignity of citizens or the business reputation of citizens and legal entities should be understood as the publication of such information in the press, broadcast on radio and television, demonstration in newsreel programs and other media, distribution on the Internet, as well as using other means of telecommunications, presentation in official characteristics, public speeches, statements addressed to officials, or a message in one form or another, including oral, to at least one person. The communication of such information to the person to whom they concern cannot be recognized as their dissemination, if the person who provided this information has taken sufficient confidentiality measures so that they do not become known to third parties.

Circumstances under which the claim is subject to satisfaction

In cases of this category, it must be borne in mind that the circumstances that, by virtue of Article 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, are important for the case, which must be determined by the judge when accepting the statement of claim and preparing the case for trial, as well as during the trial, are: dissemination by the defendant of information about the plaintiff, discrediting the nature of this information and its inconsistency with reality. In the absence of at least one of these circumstances, the claim cannot be satisfied by the court.

Review of the practice of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation 2016:

Claims for compensation for harm, including compensation for moral damage, see section "

At the request of interested persons, the protection of the honor, dignity and business reputation of a citizen is allowed even after his death.

7. The application to the violator of measures of responsibility for non-execution of a court decision does not relieve him of the obligation to perform the action provided for by the court decision.

Commentary on Article 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation

Honor, dignity, business reputation of a citizen in the aggregate determine the "good name", the inviolability of which is guaranteed by the Constitution (Article 23).

First, the information must be damaging. The assessment of information as discrediting is based not on a subjective, but on an objective sign. Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of August 18, 1992 N 11 "On Certain Issues Arising in Courts Considering Cases on the Protection of the Honor and Dignity of Citizens, as well as the Business Reputation of Citizens and Legal Entities" specifically notes that "discrediting is information that does not correspond to reality, containing allegations of a violation by a citizen or organization of the current legislation or moral principles (of committing a dishonest act, improper behavior in the workforce, everyday life and other information discrediting production, economic and social activities, business reputation, etc.), which detract from the honor and dignity".

Secondly, information must be disseminated. The aforementioned Decree of the Plenum of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation also clarifies what should be understood by the dissemination of information: "The publication of such information in the press, broadcast on radio and television programs, demonstration in newsreel programs and other mass media (media), presentation in official references, public speeches, statements addressed to officials, or a communication in any other form, including oral, to several or at least one person. It is specifically emphasized that the communication of information to the person to whom they concern is not considered as dissemination in private.

3. For the protection of the honor, dignity and business reputation of the deceased, see comments. to Art. 150 GK.

5. From paragraph 2 of the commented article it follows that in all cases of infringement on honor, dignity and business reputation, a citizen is provided with judicial protection. Therefore, the rule established by the Mass Media Law, according to which the victim must first apply to the media with a request for refutation, cannot be considered as mandatory.

A special resolution on this issue is contained in the Decree of the Plenum of the RF Armed Forces dated August 18, 1992 N 11. It notes that "clauses 1 and 7 of article 152 of the first part of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation establish that a citizen has the right to demand in court a refutation of discrediting him honor, dignity or business reputation of information, and a legal entity - information discrediting its business reputation.At the same time, the law does not provide for the obligatory preliminary filing of such a demand against the defendant, including in the case when a claim is filed against the mass media that disseminated the indicated above information".

Failure to comply with these court decisions is punishable by a fine in accordance with Art. 406 Code of Civil Procedure and art. 206 APC in the amount of up to 200 minimum wages established by law.

7. Special methods of protection - giving a refutation or answer are applied regardless of the fault of the persons who allowed the dissemination of such information.

9. In the event of a violation of the business reputation of a legal entity, it has the right to demand a refutation of the widespread discrediting information, replacement of the issued document, publication of a response in the media, establishment of the fact that the disseminated information does not correspond to reality, etc. The legal entity has the right to demand compensation for losses. With regard to non-pecuniary damage, it is in accordance with Art. 151 of the Civil Code is compensated only to citizens, since only they can undergo moral and physical suffering.