Article 309. Bribery or coercion to give testimony or evasion of testimony or incorrect translation

1. Bribery of a witness, victim for the purpose of giving false testimony, or an expert, specialist for the purpose of giving a false conclusion or false testimony, as well as a translator for the purpose of making an incorrect translation -

shall be punishable by a fine in the amount of up to eighty thousand rubles, or in the amount of the wages or other income of the convicted person for a period of up to six months, or by compulsory labor for a term of up to four hundred and eighty hours, or by corrective labor for a term of up to two years, or by arrest for a term of up to three months.

2. Forcing a witness, a victim to give false testimony, an expert, a specialist to give a false conclusion or a translator to carry out an incorrect translation, as well as forcing these persons to evade testifying, combined with blackmail, threats of murder, harm to health, destruction or damage property of these persons or their relatives, -

shall be punishable by a fine in the amount of up to two hundred thousand rubles, or in the amount of the wages or other income of the convicted person for a period of up to eighteen months, or by forced labor for a term of up to three years, or by arrest for a term of three to six months, or by imprisonment for a term of up to three years. .

3. An act provided for in part two of this article, committed with the use of violence that is not dangerous to the life or health of these persons, -

shall be punishable by forced labor for a term of up to five years or imprisonment for the same term.

4. Acts provided for in parts one or two of this article, committed by an organized group or with the use of violence dangerous to the life or health of these persons, -

shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of three to seven years.

• Article 308. Refusal of a witness or victim to testify
• Article 310. Disclosure of preliminary investigation data

Commentary to Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

This crime is one of the forms of opposition to justice, the interests of which will be its main object. As an additional object, a crime under Part 1 of Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the interests of the accused, the defendant, the civil plaintiff, the civil defendant can act, and the crimes provided for in Part 2 - 4 of Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - property relations, health, honor, dignity and safety conditions for the lives of citizens.

The social danger of the crime under comment is that the commission of the actions specified in this norm may entail the adoption by the court of an illegal and unfounded decision or resolution, an illegal and unfounded conviction or acquittal. In addition, bribery and coercion of a witness, victim, expert, or translator prevent them from conscientiously performing procedural duties.

According to the legislative structure of Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is formulated in four parts: 1) bribery of a witness, victim, expert, specialist or translator; 2) coercion of these persons to give false testimony (expert opinion, specialist testimony, incorrect translation), as well as to evade testimony, combined with blackmail, threats of murder, harm to health, destruction or damage to the property of these persons or their loved ones; 3) coercion of the named persons, committed with the use of violence not dangerous to life and health; 4) bribery or coercion committed by an organized group or with the use of violence dangerous to the life and health of these persons.

All these actions can be performed at any stage of the criminal, civil, arbitration, and administrative process. These actions can be performed in advance - before the process, and even after it - in anticipation of a review of the relevant court decision.

———————————

Course of Russian criminal law. Special part / Ed. V.N. Kudryavtseva, A.V. Naumova. M., 2002. P. 898.

The objective side of the crimes provided for in Parts 1 and 2 of Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, is carried out through action (bribery or coercion). The elements of crimes are constructed as formal and are complete from the moment the actions specified in the law are committed, regardless of whether the perpetrator achieves the required result.

Part 1 of Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation provides for liability for bribing a witness, victim, expert, specialist or translator for the purpose of giving false testimony, false conclusions or incorrect translation.

Under bribery in Part 1 of Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation should be understood as an illegal transfer to a witness, a victim for the purpose of giving false testimony, or an expert for the purpose of giving them a false conclusion or false testimony, a specialist for the purpose of giving them false testimony, as well as a translator for the purpose of making an incorrect transfer of money, securities, other property, as well as the illegal provision of services of a property nature to them for the commission of actions in the interests of the giver.

Thus, the subject of bribery in Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is similar to the subject of the crime in Art. Art. 290 and 204 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The content of the subject of bribery is disclosed in paragraph 9 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of February 10, 2000 No. 6 “On judicial practice in cases of bribery and commercial bribery.” The subject of bribery is, along with money, securities and other property, benefits or services of a property nature that are provided free of charge, but are subject to payment (provision of tourist vouchers, apartment renovation, construction of a summer house, etc.). Benefits of a property nature include, in particular, a reduction in the value of transferred property, privatized objects, a reduction in rental payments, and interest rates for using bank loans. The time of their transfer (before or after the commission of actions in the interests of the giver) does not affect the qualification of the act.

———————————

Bulletin of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. 2000. N 4.

The transfer of illegal remuneration during bribery is considered completed from the moment the recipient accepts at least part of the transferred values.

If the named persons refuse to receive the subject of bribery, the actions of the perpetrator should be qualified under Part 3 of Art. 30 and part 1 art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

If the conditional transfer of valuables did not take place due to circumstances beyond the control of the persons who tried to transfer the subject of bribery, what they did should be qualified as an attempted bribery.

The expressed intention of a person to give money, securities, other property or to provide the opportunity to illegally use material services in cases where the person did not take any specific actions to implement the expressed intention cannot be qualified as attempted bribery.

When deciding the issue of liability under Part 1 of Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it does not matter either the size of the bribe or the fact that the witness, victim, expert, specialist and translator did not fulfill the request of the person who committed the bribery. The actual fulfillment of the agreement reached is not included in this crime.

———————————

Since the size of the bribe does not matter, the criminal case cannot be terminated due to the insignificance of the transferred amount or the value of the subject of bribery, provided that the intent to bribe is proven.

Responsibility of recipients of bribery under Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is not provided for, they are only responsible for false testimony, etc. (Article 307 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

Receiving the subject of bribery without the intention to perform the necessary actions should be qualified as fraud under Art. 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

The owner of valuables in such cases is liable for attempted bribery if the transfer of valuables was intended to accomplish the action he desired.

If a person receives money or other valuables from someone, allegedly for the purpose of bribery, and, without intending to do so, appropriates them, what he has done should also be qualified as fraud. The actions of the owner of valuables in such cases are subject to qualification as attempted bribery. It does not matter whether a specific person was named to whom the illegal reward was supposed to be transferred during bribery.

Part 2 Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation provides for liability for forcing a witness, a victim to give false testimony, an expert to give a false conclusion or testimony, a specialist to give false testimony or an interpreter to carry out an incorrect translation, as well as forcing these persons to evade testifying, combined with blackmail, threat of murder, harm to health, destruction or damage to the property of these persons or their loved ones.

As can be seen from the content of the disposition of the norm in question, coercion of these persons to commit illegal actions is carried out by the guilty in two forms - in coercion to give false testimony (conclusion), to carry out incorrect translation and in coercion to evade giving testimony.

In this case, evading testimony should be understood as a person’s refusal to appear for questioning by the person conducting the inquiry, the investigator, the prosecutor, or the court, despite their summons, concealing his location, changing his place of residence, etc.

The procedural subjects specified in this norm are forced to commit acts for which they themselves bear criminal or procedural responsibility. Thus, they are harmed not only by the use of the methods of coercion specified in the law, but also by inducing them to illegal behavior for which punishment is provided.

In law enforcement practice, when applying the norm in question, there is a problem of understanding the term “testimony”. This problem is especially relevant when considering cases of private prosecution, when the perpetrator persuades the victim, under the threat of violence, not to change his testimony, but to “withdraw the statement,” i.e. stop criminal prosecution. In this case, the intent of the offender does not include forcing the victim to give false information about the circumstances of the incident, but forcing him to refuse a statement as a procedural basis for criminal prosecution. Consequently, in this case we can only talk about crimes against the person or property of a citizen, but not against justice.

When conducting a preliminary investigation, the question also often arises about the possibility of criminal prosecution under Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, if coercion to testify or to evade testifying took place at the time of the commission of a crime or immediately after its commission, when the preliminary investigation authorities have not yet become aware of the act committed, or when an eyewitness or victim is forced to give false explanations as part of the collection of verification information material before the initiation of a criminal case, when law enforcement agencies already have a report of a crime. Qualification problems also arise when a criminal case has been initiated, a person has given explanations as part of the verification material, but has not yet been summoned to the preliminary investigation body to testify, and at this moment pressure is put on him in order to induce him to give false testimony.

Due to the fact that in this situation, from the point of view of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, there are no subjects of encroachment, such as the victim or witness, i.e. These persons are procedurally outside the scope of the preliminary investigation and trial, then the crime provided for in Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, is absent, but there is a crime against the person. The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation takes a similar position.

———————————

A similar point of view was expressed earlier. See: Barysheva V. Responsibility for perjury and coercion to testify // Legality. 2003. N 5. P. 50.

Review of judicial practice in criminal cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation for the second quarter of 2002. Resolution No. 155p02pr in the case of Shiganov and Admaev // Bulletin of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. 2002. N 12.

Coercion is mental violence against a witness, victim, expert, specialist or interpreter as a way to force them to give false testimony, conclusion, mistranslation or avoid testifying. Such mental influence is carried out through threats, an exhaustive list of which is given in the law. These include: blackmail, i.e. the threat of dissemination of disgraceful, as well as other information, the disclosure of which could damage the honor and dignity of the victim or his relatives, regardless of whether they really are such for a given person, whether they correspond to the truth or not; threat of murder, harm to health, threat of destruction or damage to the property of these persons or their loved ones.

———————————

See: paragraph 3 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of May 4, 1990 No. 3 “On judicial practice in cases of extortion” (as amended in 1996) // Collection of resolutions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on criminal cases / Compiled . S.G. Lastochkina, N.N. Khokhlova. 4th ed., revised. and additional M., 2004. P. 206.

The threat to commit other actions not specified in the law does not constitute the crime in question.

To qualify such actions, it does not matter whether the perpetrator intended to carry out the threat. It is important that it is significant for the person who is forced to give false testimony, false conclusion, incorrect translation, and is perceived by him as a real danger and is in a causal connection with coercion. The form of expression of the threat does not matter for qualification.

Coercion to give false testimony, imprisonment, incorrect translation or evasion of testimony is considered completed from the moment the corresponding demand is presented, supported by a threat, regardless of whether the perpetrator has achieved his goal or not. If the threat is fully or partially carried out, the deed is further qualified under the relevant article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, except for the cases specified in Parts 3 and 4 of Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

As explained in one of the decisions of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the actions of a person who invited another person to give false testimony, but did not threaten the latter with murder, violence, or destruction of property, do not constitute the crime in question.

———————————

Bulletin of the Supreme Court of the RSFSR. 1962. N 8. P. 11.

Influencing a witness, victim, expert or translator with the aim of getting them to give false testimony (conclusion) in another way (requests, persuasion, attempts to mollify) may entail liability not under Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, but as incitement to give false testimony under Art. Art. 33 and 307 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

The subjective side of the crime is expressed in direct intent.

In bribery, the perpetrator is aware that he is providing a witness, victim, expert or translator with a specific property benefit for giving false testimony, conclusion, translation, and wants to commit similar actions.

A person who forces the giving of false testimony, imprisonment, translation or evasion of testimony is aware that he is forcing, by suppressing the will of the victim through blackmail, threats of murder, harm to health, destruction or damage to property, persons specified in the law or their relatives to give false statements. testimony, conclusion, translation, or to evade testifying, and wishes to do so.

The purpose of the crime is to obtain false testimony, imprisonment, mistranslation or refusal of testimony.

The motives for the crime in question can be different: revenge, self-interest, the desire to avoid prosecution, etc.

The general subject of the crime is a sane person who has reached the age of sixteen.

The subject of a crime under Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, there can be both participants in the process (for example, a plaintiff, a defendant, an accused, another witness, etc.) and third parties. When an organized group operates, the perpetrator of bribery or coercion may be one person, but he acts on behalf of or with the consent of the group.

Part 3 Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation provides for liability for committing a crime with the use of violence that is not dangerous to the life and health of these persons. Such violence should be understood as beatings or other violent acts associated with causing physical pain to the victim or restricting his freedom (tying his hands, using handcuffs, leaving him in a closed room, etc.).

According to Part 4 of Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, a particularly qualified type of crime is the actions provided for in Part 1 (bribery) and Part 2 (coercion), if they were committed by an organized group or with the use of violence dangerous to life or health, i.e. such violence that resulted in the infliction of grave and moderate harm to the health of the victim, as well as the infliction of minor harm to health, causing a short-term health disorder or a minor permanent loss of general ability to work. This type also includes violence, although it did not cause harm to the health of the victim, but at the time of use it created a real danger to his life or health.

At the same time, taking into account that the sanction of Part 4 of Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation provides for imprisonment for a term of up to seven years, and the sanction of Part 1 of Art. 111 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - up to eight years, we can conclude that the concept of violence dangerous to life or health, in the composition provided for in Part 4 of Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, covers only harm to health of moderate severity. When causing serious harm to health, the person’s actions are classified as a set of crimes provided for in Part 4 of Art. 309 and art. 111 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

The concept of an organized group is given in accordance with Part 3 of Art. 35 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and is also disclosed in paragraph 15 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of December 27, 2002 N 29 “On judicial practice in cases of theft, robbery and robbery.”

If the crimes in question are recognized as committed by an organized group, the actions of all accomplices, regardless of their role in the crime, are subject to qualification as co-perpetrators without reference to Art. 33 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

The issue of criminal liability of persons who fulfilled the demands of the subject of a crime under duress must be resolved taking into account the provisions of Art. 40 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on physical and mental coercion.

Judicial practice under Article 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

Cassation ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated August 22, 2019 N 49-UD19-14
- July 16, 2015 under Part 3 of Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to 1 year 8 months of suspended imprisonment with a probationary period of 8 months, - January 14, 2021 under Part 4 of Art. 222 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to 7 months in prison;

Appeal ruling of the Appeal Board of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated November 16, 2018 N APL18-511

- accused Gobozov M.S. indicates that decisions to initiate criminal cases under Part 2 of Article 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on the facts of threats to victims, given in support of the petition of the Deputy Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation to change territorial jurisdiction, took place in 2011 - 2012, the statute of limitations for these crimes has expired; there is no evidence of real threats to the safety of participants in the trial; The very fact that, according to the prosecution, not all members of the criminal community were detained is not a basis for changing territorial jurisdiction. Taking into account the fact that most of the incriminated crimes were committed on the territory of the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania, where most of the victims and witnesses live, consideration of the case in the Moscow District Military Court will complicate their appearance at the court hearing and will lead to a violation of his rights to the opportunity to interrogate those testifying against him persons will lead to unjustified delay in the consideration of the case. Requests to cancel the decision and send the case for consideration to the Supreme Court of the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania;

Appeal ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 06/09/2017 N 81-APU17-5

He was acquitted under Part 1 of Art. 210 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on the basis of clause 3, part 2, art. 302 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation due to the lack of corpus delicti in his actions, under paragraph “a” of Part 3 of Art. 163 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (extortion from B.) under clause “a”, part 3 of art. 163 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (extortion from K.) under clause “a”, part 3 of art. 163 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (extortion from I.) under clause “a”, part 3 of Art. 163 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (extortion from G.) under clause “a”, part 3 of art. 163 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (extortion from Kh.) under Part 4 of Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on the basis of clause 2, part 2, art. 302 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation due to non-involvement in the commission of these crimes.

Appeal ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 09/07/2017 N 34-APU17-5

both were acquitted of committing crimes under paragraphs “a”, “d”, part 3 of Art. 228.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (as amended by Federal Law No. 87-FZ of May 19, 2010), Part 5 of Art. 228.1, part 5 art. 228.1, part 3 art. , part 5 art. 228.1, part 1 art. , paragraphs “a”, “g”, part 4, art. 228.1, part 4 art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in accordance with clause 1, part 1, art. 27, pp. 2 hours 2 tbsp. 302 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, due to non-involvement in the commission of these crimes.

Appeal ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated November 9, 2017 N 14-APU17-13

according to Part 3 of Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to 2 years in prison; on the basis of Part 3 of Art. The Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for the totality of crimes by partial addition of punishments was finally assigned to A.V. Lavrov. 9 years of imprisonment to be served in a maximum security penal colony.

Appeal ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated July 4, 2019 N 80-APU19-2sp

In addition, he indicates that on 12/03/18 witnesses D. and K. were brought to court. During the break, while in the corridor, K. turned to the state prosecutor Ryabov with the words that she did not intend to slander the defendant Suleymanova, which was what the employees had previously demanded of her law enforcement. As a result, K. was removed from the courtroom and on that day, December 3, 2018, she was never questioned, despite the fact that her name was announced at the court hearing among other people who appeared. Based on this, he concludes that the testimony of prosecution witnesses is untruthful due to the influence exerted on them, and in the actions of unidentified law enforcement officers there are signs of a crime under Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Appeal ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated October 1, 2019 N 44-APU19-12

- part 2 art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to punishment in the form of a fine in the amount of 100,000 rubles; - part 1 art. 139 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to punishment in the form of a fine in the amount of 30,000 rubles; - clauses “b”, “c”, part 2, art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to 16 years in prison with restriction of freedom for a period of 1 year 6 months.

Appeal ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated May 6, 2019 N 80-APU19-1sp

sentenced under Part 1 of Article 111 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (as amended by Federal Law of March 7, 2011 N 26-FZ) (in relation to A.) ​​to 4 years in prison, under Part 2 of Article 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to a fine of 100,000 rubles and on the basis of paragraph “a” of Part 1 of Article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, released from punishment, under Part 1 of Article 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to a fine in the amount of 40,000 rubles and on the basis of paragraph “a” of Part 1 of Article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation; released from punishment; under paragraph “a” of part 3 of Article 163 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for 9 years of imprisonment with restriction of freedom for 1 year 6 months, under paragraph “a” of part 3 of Article 126 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (for the episode in relation to K.) for 8 years 6 months of imprisonment freedom with restriction of freedom for 1 year 3 months, under Part 3 of Article 222 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for 5 years 6 months of imprisonment;

Appeal ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated June 17, 2020 No. 3-APU19-10

Believes that the appearance of this episode was due to the fact that M. initially designated Khachemizov as a member of the organized criminal group, without having specific information, and it was necessary to somehow “involve” Khachemizov, and M. to confirm that he was fulfilling the terms of the cooperation agreement . At the same time, M. had previously lied, was prosecuted and was convicted under Art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, witness M. witnessed how M. persuaded P. to give false testimony in the case. All this suggests that the court should have been more critical of his testimony.

Determination of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated December 20, 2018 N 3395-O

paragraph 1 of part two and part four of Article 281 “Disclosure of the testimony of the victim and witness” of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, since they, according to the applicant, are in conjunction with part two of Article 317.1, articles 317.3, 401.6 and part one of Article 415 of the same Code, as well as Article 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation allows the reading in court of testimony obtained during the preliminary investigation of persons whose interrogation cannot be carried out by the defense due to the death of the victim or witness who gave this testimony or the refusal to testify in court of the accused in another criminal case separated after concluding a pre-trial agreement on cooperation in the absence of sufficient guarantees of the reliability of previously obtained testimony;

Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 02/03/2021 N 137-P20

according to Part 3 of Art. , part 4 art. 309 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for 3 years 6 months. Based on Part 3 of Art. of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on the totality of crimes committed to Firstov S.I. sentenced to 13 years in prison with a fine of 700,000 rubles.

Civil Code of the Russian Federation Part 1

Chapter 22. PERFORMANCE OF OBLIGATIONS

Article 309. General provisions

Obligations must be fulfilled properly in accordance with the terms of the obligation and the requirements of the law, other legal acts, and in the absence of such conditions and requirements - in accordance with business customs or other usually imposed requirements.

Article 310. Inadmissibility of unilateral refusal to fulfill an obligation

Unilateral refusal to fulfill an obligation and unilateral change of its terms are not allowed, except in cases provided for by law. Unilateral refusal to fulfill an obligation related to the implementation by its parties of entrepreneurial activity and unilateral change in the terms of such an obligation are also allowed in cases provided for by the contract, unless otherwise follows from the law or the essence of the obligation.

Article 311. Fulfillment of an obligation in parts

The creditor has the right not to accept the fulfillment of the obligation in parts, unless otherwise provided by law, other legal acts, the terms of the obligation and does not follow from the customs of business or the essence of the obligation.

Article 312. Fulfillment of an obligation to the proper person

Unless otherwise provided by agreement of the parties and does not follow from the customs of business or the essence of the obligation, the debtor has the right, when fulfilling the obligation, to demand evidence that the fulfillment is accepted by the creditor himself or a person authorized by him to do so, and bears the risk of the consequences of failure to present such a requirement.

Article 313. Fulfillment of an obligation by a third party

1. The fulfillment of an obligation may be entrusted by the debtor to a third party, unless the law, other legal acts, the terms of the obligation or its essence imply that the debtor is obligated to fulfill the obligation personally. In this case, the creditor is obliged to accept the performance offered for the debtor by a third party.

2. A third party who is in danger of losing his right to the debtor’s property (the right to lease, pledge, etc.) as a result of the creditor’s foreclosure on this property may, at his own expense, satisfy the creditor’s claim without the debtor’s consent. In this case, the rights of the creditor under the obligation are transferred to the third party in accordance with Articles 382 - 387 of this Code.

Article 314. Time limit for fulfilling an obligation

1. If an obligation stipulates or makes it possible to determine the day of its execution or the period of time during which it must be performed, the obligation is subject to execution on this day or, accordingly, at any time within such period.

2. In cases where an obligation does not provide for a deadline for its fulfillment and does not contain conditions allowing to determine this period, it must be fulfilled within a reasonable time after the obligation arises.

An obligation that is not fulfilled within a reasonable time, as well as an obligation whose performance period is determined by the moment of demand, the debtor is obliged to fulfill within seven days from the date the creditor submits a demand for its fulfillment, unless the obligation to perform within a different period follows from the law, other legal acts, conditions obligations, customs of business or the substance of the obligation.

Article 315. Early fulfillment of an obligation

The debtor has the right to fulfill the obligation before the deadline, unless otherwise provided by law, other legal acts or terms of the obligation or follows from its essence. However, early fulfillment of obligations related to the implementation of business activities by its parties is allowed only in cases where the possibility of fulfilling the obligation before the deadline is provided for by law, other legal acts or terms of the obligation, or follows from customs of business or the essence of the obligation.

Article 316. Place of fulfillment of the obligation

If the place of performance is not determined by law, other legal acts or agreement, or is not clear from business customs or the essence of the obligation, performance must be made:

under the obligation to transfer a land plot, building, structure or other real estate - at the location of the property;

under an obligation to transfer goods or other property that involves its transportation - at the place of delivery of the property to the first carrier for delivery to the creditor;

for other obligations of the entrepreneur to transfer goods or other property - at the place of production or storage of the property, if this place was known to the creditor at the time the obligation arose;

for a monetary obligation - at the place of residence of the creditor at the time the obligation arose, and if the creditor is a legal entity - at its location at the time the obligation arose; if the creditor at the time of fulfillment of the obligation changed his place of residence or location and notified the debtor about this - at the new place of residence or location of the creditor with the costs associated with the change of place of performance being charged to the creditor’s account;

for all other obligations - at the place of residence of the debtor, and if the debtor is a legal entity - at its location.

Article 317. Currency of monetary obligations

1. Monetary obligations must be expressed in rubles (Article 140).

2. A monetary obligation may stipulate that it is payable in rubles in an amount equivalent to a certain amount in foreign currency or in conventional monetary units (ecus, “special drawing rights”, etc.). In this case, the amount payable in rubles is determined at the official exchange rate of the relevant currency or conventional monetary units on the day of payment, unless a different rate or another date for its determination is established by law or by agreement of the parties.

3. The use of foreign currency, as well as payment documents in foreign currency when making payments on the territory of the Russian Federation for obligations, is permitted in cases, in the manner and on the conditions determined by law or in the manner established by it.

Article 318. Increase in amounts paid for the maintenance of a citizen

The amount paid under a monetary obligation directly for the maintenance of a citizen is indexed in cases and in the manner established by law or agreement. (as amended by Federal Laws dated November 26, 2002 N 152-FZ, dated November 30, 2011 N 363-FZ)

Article 319. The order of repayment of claims under a monetary obligation

The amount of the payment made, which is insufficient to fulfill the monetary obligation in full, in the absence of another agreement, first of all pays off the creditor’s costs of obtaining fulfillment, then interest, and the remainder - the principal amount of the debt.

Article 320. Fulfillment of an alternative obligation

The debtor, who is obliged to transfer one or another property to the creditor or to perform one of two or more actions, has the right to choose, unless otherwise follows from the law, other legal acts or the terms of the obligation.

Article 321. Fulfillment of an obligation in which several creditors or several debtors participate

If several creditors or several debtors are involved in an obligation, then each of the creditors has the right to demand performance, and each of the debtors is obliged to fulfill the obligation in an equal share with the others insofar as it does not follow otherwise from the law, other legal acts or the terms of the obligation.

Article 322. Joint and several obligations

1. A joint obligation (liability) or a joint claim arises if the solidarity of the duty or claim is provided for by an agreement or established by law, in particular when the subject of the obligation is indivisible.

2. The obligations of several debtors under an obligation related to entrepreneurial activity, as well as the claims of several creditors in such an obligation, are joint and several, unless otherwise provided by law, other legal acts or terms of the obligation.

Article 323. Rights of the creditor in case of joint and several liability

1. In the event of a joint obligation of debtors, the creditor has the right to demand performance both from all debtors jointly and from any of them separately, both in full and in part of the debt.

2. A creditor who has not received full satisfaction from one of the joint and several debtors has the right to demand what was not received from the remaining joint and several debtors.

Joint and several debtors remain obligated until the obligation is fully fulfilled.

Article 324. Objections to the creditor’s claims in case of joint and several liability

In the case of a joint and several obligation, the debtor does not have the right to raise objections against the creditor’s claim based on relations of other debtors with the creditor in which this debtor does not participate.

Article 325. Fulfillment of a joint and several obligation by one of the debtors

1. Fulfillment of a joint and several obligation in full by one of the debtors releases the remaining debtors from fulfillment to the creditor.

2. Unless otherwise follows from the relations between joint and several debtors:

1) the debtor who has fulfilled a joint and several obligation has the right of recourse against the remaining debtors in equal shares minus the share falling on himself;

2) what is not paid by one of the joint and several debtors to the debtor who has fulfilled the joint and several obligation falls in equal shares on this debtor and on the other debtors.

3. The rules of this article are applied accordingly when a joint and several obligation is terminated by offsetting the counterclaim of one of the debtors.

Article 326. Joint and several claims

1. If the claim is solidary, any of the joint creditors has the right to file a claim against the debtor in full.

Before a claim is made by one of the joint creditors, the debtor has the right to fulfill the obligation to any of them at his own discretion.

2. The debtor has no right to raise objections against the claim of one of the joint creditors based on the relationship of the debtor with another joint creditor in which this creditor does not participate.

3. Fulfillment of an obligation in full by one of the joint creditors releases the debtor from fulfillment to the remaining creditors.

4. A joint and several creditor who has received performance from a debtor is obliged to compensate what is due to other creditors in equal shares, unless otherwise follows from the relations between them.

Article 327. Fulfillment of an obligation by depositing a debt

1. The debtor has the right to deposit the money or securities due from him into a notary deposit, and in cases established by law, into a court deposit - if the obligation cannot be fulfilled by the debtor due to:

1) the absence of the creditor or the person authorized by him to accept performance in the place where the obligation must be fulfilled;

2) the incapacity of the creditor and the absence of his representative;

3) an obvious lack of certainty as to who is the creditor of the obligation, in particular in connection with a dispute on this issue between the creditor and other persons;

4) the creditor’s evasion from accepting performance or other delay on his part.

2. Depositing a sum of money or securities with a notary or court is considered the fulfillment of an obligation.

The notary or the court, in whose deposit the money or securities are deposited, notifies the creditor about this.

Article 328. Counter-fulfillment of obligations

1. The fulfillment of an obligation by one of the parties, which, in accordance with the contract, is conditioned by the fulfillment of its obligations by the other party, is recognized as counter.

2. If the obligated party fails to provide the performance of the obligation stipulated by the contract or there are circumstances clearly indicating that such performance will not be carried out within the established period, the party on which the counter-performance lies has the right to suspend the performance of its obligation or refuse to perform this obligation and demand compensation for losses.

If the fulfillment of the obligation stipulated by the contract is not carried out in full, the party on whom the counter-performance lies has the right to suspend the fulfillment of its obligation or refuse to perform in the part corresponding to the unprovided performance.

3. If reciprocal performance of an obligation is made despite the other party’s failure to provide the performance of its obligation stipulated by the contract, this party is obliged to provide such performance.

4. The rules provided for in paragraphs 2 and 3 of this article apply unless otherwise provided by agreement or law.