A small household transaction is ... Art. 26 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Rights to Transactions

In Art. 26 Civil Code of the Russian Federation the limits of the legal capacity of persons of 14-18 years are defined. Juveniles can independently dispose of their income (earnings, scholarships). They can realize the author's rights to a work of literature, science, art, invention or another product of their own intellectual work. They are allowed to contribute to the credit and financial structures. In addition, persons aged 14-18 can exercise small household transactions, amount which should not be higher than the limits established in the norms. They are stipulated by item 2 of Art. 28 of the Code.

Having reached the age of 16, minors canbecome members of cooperatives, according to the legislation regulating the activities of these associations. In order to carry out other legally significant actions, persons with limited legal capacity must obtain the written consent of legal representatives. In accordance with Art. 26 Civil Code of the Russian Federation, persons of 14-18 years are responsible for the actions they carried out in accordance with paragraphs 1 and 2. For the harm caused by them, the legislation provides for punishment.

Specificity of partial capacity

The lower limit of the age from which in Russiaa person can make deals, - 6 years. In different countries this threshold is different. For example, in Armenia, Czech Republic, Uzbekistan it is the same as in Russia. In Turkmenistan, Estonia, Azerbaijan - 7, and in Costa Rica - 15 years. Accordingly, up to this limit, all legal actions of the child are the responsibility of legal representatives - parents / guardians, adoptive parents.

Small household transaction

Civil Code of the Russian Federation provides for certain legal opportunities for persons aged 6-14. These subjects have limited legal capacity and are referred to as juveniles. Persons under six do not have rights to trade. The general procedure for the realization of legal possibilities by minors is defined in Art. 28 of the Code. In paragraph 2 of the rule it is indicated that the said entities can make transactions:

1. Considered small household.
2. Directed to gratuitous receipt of benefits and not requiring state registration or notarization.
3. By order of funds that are provided by a legal representative or with his consent by a third party for specific purposes or free spending.

The Code does not directly define what is small household transaction. it The concept, however, is often used injudicial practice and legal publications. In the process of applying the category, its features were derived. First of all, the criterion by which the small household transaction is the age of the subject. The material condition of the family as a whole, however, does not matter. The second criterion - purchase amount. As a limit, 5 MROT is used (by analogy with Article 575 of the Code). The third criterion to be met small household transaction is no harm to the normal development and health of the child. In practice, other signs are used. A young person can carry out different small household transactions. Examples: purchase of food, school supplies, toys, etc. in the store.

Explained

In Art. 28 indicates the type of action of minors aimed at non-reimbursable meeting the needs - profit. In this case, the law establishes certain requirements. First of all, transactions should not provide for state registration or notarization. For some contracts, these procedures are directly established by law. In particular, state transactions are subject to real estate transactions. A donation contract is considered free. If an immovable object is transferred, registration is required. The gift of a vehicle is carried out without observing this procedure. Registration of the vehicle is technical in nature and has an accounting value. The right of ownership appears in the recipient in accordance with the contract at the time of transfer. From this we can conclude that the child may well take or give a car. However, the fact of the independent conclusion of such a treaty by juveniles is doubtful. Notarization is provided for in the agreement of the parties, and it may not be established by law for specific transactions. As for the ability to dispose of funds provided by a legal representative or a third party with his consent, they have no great practical value. This circumstance is due to the fact that the expenditure of money can in such cases be carried out exclusively within the framework of small transactions.

Restrictions

In other articles of the Code, as well as in a number of federal laws, the limits in which small household transaction. it, in particular, the above-mentioned art. 575. Under para. 1 of this rule, donation is prohibited, except for ordinary gifts, the cost of which is less than 3 thousand rubles, on behalf of minors by legal representatives. From the meaning of the norm comes the ban on the implementation of such actions by the minors themselves.

A responsibility

It is provided for in paragraph 3 of Art. 28 of the Code. In some cases meeting the needs minors can cause harm. Responsibility for it is borne by adults. The provisions of Art. 28 are specified in art. 172, as well as art. 1073 of the Code. In particular, the transaction is considered to be insignificant, except for the small and other, stipulated by item 2 of Art. 28, committed by a person up to 14 liters. Each party in this case is obliged to return the other all that was received, in kind. If this option is not available, then the participants will refund the value of the items in money. In addition, the competent party compensates for actual damage if it was or could have been aware of the incapacity of the other.

Nuances

In the interests of a minor, the transaction that was himcan be recognized as valid. This is the case if the court finds that it was carried out for the benefit of a person with limited legal capacity. For the harm that was inflicted on the young, his legal representatives answer, unless they prove that there is no fault in the occurrence of damage.

Arbitrage practice

If a juvenile was placed in an organization fororphans and those who have remained without parental care, this institution must compensate for the harm caused by the child, if not prove, the absence of this guilt. If the damage was inflicted during the period when a citizen under the age of 14 was under temporary supervision of a medical, educational or other institution or a person who was looking after him in accordance with the contract, the said subjects would be responsible for him. Punishment will not be imposed only if these organizations prove that their guilt is not caused in harm.

In one of the definitions of the Arbitration Court in the case of compensationexpenses for the purchase of medicines and moral harm inflicted by a minor while in school, noted that the educational institution was obliged to exercise proper supervision of the child. Exemption from liability for the damage the school could be released if it could prove the absence of its guilt. Then the question would be raised about attracting parents. The Supreme Court ruled that the conclusions of the lower court, which imposed on the legitimate representatives of the child the responsibility to compensate for the harm, are unlawful. The first instance, in particular, indicated that the defendants (parents) could not prove the absence of their guilt in the improper upbringing of the child. Meanwhile, at the time of the injury, the young was under the supervision of the school. This, in turn, means that the responsibility lay in the educational institution.

Important point

The duty of guardians, parents, adoptive parents, andmedical, educational and other institutions for compensation for harm inflicted to a minor, does not cease when he or she reaches the age of majority or obtain sufficient property to compensate for the damage. If the legal representatives have died or do not have the necessary amount of money to pay off the claims, the person himself has become legally competent and has the necessary amount available, taking into account the property status of the parties, the court may partially or completely transfer the respective obligation to the wrongdoer.

Recommendations

Judicial practice is quite commonproceedings in cases involving the commission of unjustified purchases by children. In such situations, not always even the sellers themselves are able to assess whether any action that involves spending money meets the needs of the minor. Therefore responsibility in a greater degree in such cases is shifted to guardians, parents, adoptive parents. In connection with the fact that a small household transaction can already be carried out by a child at the age of six, experts recommend that legal representatives monitor the amount of cash available to the child. As a rule, pocket money becomes the main source of funds. At each replenishment of savings it is necessary to conduct conversations with the child concerning possible and permissible acquisitions. Shopping should not go beyond reason. As practice shows, calm explanation of the situation can prevent a lot of problems.

Conclusion

Currently, pocket funds in manyfamilies are the norm. As a rule, their amount does not exceed reasonable limits. There are, however, situations where the bank cards of parents are placed at the disposal of a minor. Such situations occur in the case of insufficient supervision of children. A child under 14 does not always understand where the limit is permitted. Accordingly, he can, even unintentionally, cause the family substantial property damage. You can blame for this situation only adults. However, sellers in stores should clearly assess the situation.