COMMERCIAL HIRING CONTRACT: ENFORCEMENT ISSUES
ДОГОВОР КОММЕРЧЕСКОГО НАЙМА: ПРОБЛЕМЫ ПРАВОПРИМЕНЕНИЯ
Уральский государственный экономический университет, Екатеринбург, Россия
* Корреспондирующий автор (larissa5[at]mail.ru)Аннотация
В условиях современной реальности очень высока потребность среди граждан в заключении договора коммерческого найма. Приводятся различные подходы к определению понятия и сущности данного вида договора. Указывается на то, что российский законодатель не уделяет должное внимание договору коммерческого найма. В Жилищном кодексе РФ вообще не упоминается такой вид договора, а Гражданский кодекс РФ лишь регулирует самые общие положения. На практике возникают проблемы, связанные с заключением, изменением и расторжением договора. В частности, неопределенность формы договора порождает споры, связанные с признанием его недействительным и применении соответствующих последствий. Приводится анализ судебной практики по вопросам, связанным с возможностью расторжения договора коммерческого найма как в судебном, так и в несудебном порядке.
Ключевые слова: договор коммерческого найма, форма договора, наниматель, наймодатель, расторжение договора, задолженность по договору.
Ural State University of Economics, Ekaterinburg, Russia
* Corresponding author (larissa5[at]mail.ru)Abstract
In modern reality, there is a very high need among citizens to conclude a commercial hire contract. Various approaches to the definition of the concept and essence of this type of contract are given. It is indicated that the Russian legislator does not pay due attention to the commercial hire contract. The Housing Code of the Russian Federation absolutely does not mention this type of contract, and the Civil Code of the Russian Federation only regulates the most general provisions. In practice, problems arise with the conclusion, modification and termination of the contract. In particular, the uncertainty of the form of the treaty gave rise to disputes relating to the invalidation of the treaty and the application of its effects. The article conducts an analysis of judicial practice on issues related to the possibility of termination of a commercial contract, both in court and non-court proceedings.
Keywords: contract of commercial hiring, contract form, employer, lessor, termination of a contract, debt on a contract.Introduction
Currently, a commercial employment contract is one of the most common options for providing residential accommodation for temporary residence. But since the Civil Code of the Russian Federation does not contain rules governing this type of contract, participants in these legal relations have to be guided by the requirements established by chapter 35 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, excluding rules directly related to the social employment contract, and often simply ignoring any written contract. The legal regulation of the commercial employment contract lags significantly behind the development of legal thought in modern Russia [10, P. 56].
The concept of commercial hiring was introduced into scientific circulation by P.V. Krashennikov [7, P. 106]. The scientist's point of view is reflected in the structure of Chapter 35 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation "Hiring residential premises," which distinguishes two types of contract for hiring residential premises [8, P. 66].
M.I. Braginsky and V.V. Vitryansky note that one of the key differences between the social employment contract and commercial employment is that in the social employment contract, it is important to comply with the living quarters established by the subject of the federation, the minimum size of the premises provided, established for one person [2, P. 149].
As a general rule, a commercial employment contract can be concluded with any person and, unlike a social employment contract, does not require prior recognition of a citizen as poor and in need of improvement of housing conditions [1, P. 52]. The contract of commercial hire of residential premises is consensual, reimbursable, bilateral, urgent. The subject matter, time, material conditions, form and price are the main components of the validity of the contract, but, unfortunately, the current legislation does not adequately regulate each of these paragraphs.
From the point of view of P.V. Krasheninnikov, which is also reflected in the structure of Chapter 35 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation "Hiring residential premises," in which two types of contract for hiring residential premises are distinguished [8, P. 66].
Since the Housing Code of the Russian Federation does not use the concept of commercial hiring of residential premises at all, but distinguishes social and non-commercial hiring into separate chapters, I consider it necessary to change the structure of chapter 35 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Initially, the title should be replaced by "Commercial hiring of residential premises," as well as the provisions on social and non-commercial employment should be deleted, since these types are a set of elements of public rather than private law, and are not intended to profit.
Ignoring the development of this institution leads to the incomplete provision of opportunities for the realization of the right to housing and the loss of state income (profit) from the provision of residential premises for use, as well as to the loss of taxes from private persons (employers) hiding their activities.
Article 671 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation contains a definition that is incomplete in terms of the subject regarding commercial hiring, since it should be possible to transfer housing to hire by other persons. The need for this addition "follows" from practice, for example, under article 128 of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, the possibility is established for a member of a housing cooperative who has not paid a full share fee to hand over part of the occupied residential premises in the house of a residential cooperative for a fee, but Art. 671 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation does not recognize it as a publisher. Thus, it is necessary to distinguish the category of mentor into a separate article, revealing all its features.
The literature actively criticizes the minimum requirements for the form of a contract [5, P. 73]. Paragraph 1 of Article 674 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation contains the instruction on a written form, but doesn't define a consequence of non-compliance with this condition, which indirectly entails recourse to Clause 1 of Article 162 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation in accordance with which non-compliance with the written form of the transaction deprives the parties of the right to refer to testimony in case of a dispute in support of the transaction and its conditions, but does not deprive them of the right to provide written and other evidence. But, since article 674 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation does not contain a direct indication of the consequences of non-compliance, such an agreement cannot be invalidated. It follows that the State creates a situation where the written form may not be observed at all by the parties [3, P. 13]. I consider it necessary to establish a provision in which non-compliance with the written form will give rise to the invalidity of the contract. In order to facilitate the "life" of the parties, the State should develop model contracts that will form the basis for the creation of a contract for the commercial employment of residential premises. It is necessary to consolidate in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and the Housing Code of the Russian Federation the principle of social orientation of any type of housing contract [6, P. 44].
It is necessary to draw up a certificate of description of the living quarters, which is drawn up immediately at the time of the transfer of the living quarters to the employer, in which each item located in the premises will be described in detail. This act will be a kind of guarantee of the parties to the contract.
The norms of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation governing the termination of the contract for commercial hiring of residential premises are characterized by a focus primarily on protecting the interests of the employer of residential premises. There is no doubt that the employer, as a weak party, should have increased guarantees of his rights, but a fair balance of interests of the parties should be observed, which, unfortunately, does not always happen in the conditions of the current legislation.
Firstly, paragraph 1 of Art. 687 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation states that the employer of a residential premises has the right, with the consent of other citizens permanently residing with him, to terminate the employment agreement at any time with a written warning to the mentor for three months. At the same time, there are no regulations in the legislation that would determine the consequences of the employer's failure to notify the employer of the termination of the contract. It is logical that in such a situation, the mentor may suffer losses due to the fact that he will not have time to immediately find a new employer.
S.V. Tkachenko proposes to supplement paragraph 1 of Art. 687 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation with a norm granting the employer the right to demand from the employer a payment for housing for three months in case of failure to fulfill the obligation of written warning about the upcoming termination of the contract [9, P. 89]. Such a rule would appear to be excessively strict for the employer; it would be more successful to give the employer of his choice the right to demand either a payment for housing for the period for which the employer has expired a warning about the upcoming termination of the contract (but not more than three months), or compensation for losses.
Paragraph 2, paragraph 4 of Art. 687 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation defines cases in which the termination of the contract for the hiring of residential premises in court at the request of the mentor is allowed. Agreeing with S.V. Tkachenko, we note that in addition to such grounds as the employer's failure to pay for housing, Destruction or damage of the dwelling, continuation of the misuse of the dwelling, or systematic violation of the rights and interests of neighbours, after warning the applicant of the use of the dwelling, The right to demand judicial termination of the contract should be granted to the employer also in the event of a reorganization by the employer, Redevelopment and reconstruction of the dwelling by the employer without the consent of the employer and his refusal to bring the dwelling into its previous condition within the prescribed period [9, P. 92]. These actions of the employer cause damage to the employer, and not only because the employer did not need the reconstruction, redevelopment or reconstruction of the housing, but also because, due to their unauthorized implementation, the court may oblige the employer to bring the housing to its previous condition, which will require costs. It seems that the right of the employer to claim damages in such a case should also be enshrined in the law.
In accordance with article 12 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the right to terminate or amend the contract serves as one of the methods for protecting violated civil rights, as well as the provisions of paragraph 2 of Art. 687 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation violate the right to protection granted to the publisher [4, P. 50]. It is also important to note that, in accordance with paragraph 2 of Art. 687 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, by a court decision, the employer may be granted a period of no more than a year to eliminate violations; only if the employer does not rectify the violations within the period specified by the court or does not take all the necessary measures to eliminate them, the court on the repeated appeal of the employer decides to terminate the contract for the rental of housing. At the same time, at the request of the employer, the court in the decision on termination of the contract may postpone the execution of the decision for a period of no more than a year.
Of course, this rule was introduced to protect the employer from eviction in a situation where, for example, for good reasons, he cannot pay for housing. However, the eviction of the employer may be delayed for a period that in total can reach two years, which will cause significant losses to the employer (who, we note, must also reapply to the court with a request for termination of the contract) due to the impossibility of using his residential premises.
It seems that, even with regard to such unequivocally guilty actions of the employer, such as the destruction or damage to the living quarters, the continuation of the misuse of the living quarters after the applicant's warning or the systematic violation of the rights and interests of neighbors, the possibility of granting a stay of execution of the court decision should be excluded. After the expiration of the period granted to the employer to remedy violations (which in itself is a sufficiently serious guarantee of his rights), the employment contract should be terminated automatically, which would eliminate the need for the employer to reapply.
The reason for the termination of a commercial employment contract at the initiative of the employer can only be the guilty behavior of the employer. In such cases, the applicant must warn the employer of the need to remedy the violation. If the employer or other citizens for whose actions he is responsible, and after warning continue to use the living quarters for their intended purpose or violate the rights and interests of neighbors, or do not fulfill the terms of the contract, the employer has the right to terminate the contract of employment of the living quarters in court.
Thus, the Megion city court appealed to the administration of the city of Megion with a lawsuit against the defendants A. on the collection of debts under the contract, termination of the contract for the hiring of residential premises and eviction from residential premises without providing another residential premises, justifying their claims by the fact that apartment number is municipal property, 29.04.2016. between A. and the administration of Megion, an agreement was concluded on the hiring of residential premises of the municipal housing stock for commercial use for a period of up to 26.04.2019. Since defendants A. did not comply with the terms of the contract, the plaintiff was forced to file this lawsuit with the court, and asked to terminate the contract of hiring residential premises as of 29.04.2016 and evict defendants A. from the premises without providing another.
At the court hearing, the representative of the plaintiff in terms of collecting the debt under the contract did not support in connection with the voluntary repayment of the debt by the defendants before considering the dispute on the merits and did not dispute the fact that the plaintiff did not apply to the defendants with a written request to terminate the above contract.
By virtue of Part 2 of Art. 452 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a requirement to amend or terminate the contract can be declared by the party to the court only after receiving the refusal of the other party to the offer to amend or terminate the contract or not receiving a response within the time specified in the proposal. Since the plaintiff did not comply with the pre-trial procedure for resolving the dispute established by law for this category of cases or the pre-trial procedure provided for by the parties' agreement, in accordance with paragraph 2 of Art. 222 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the court left the statement of claim without consideration.
Thus, despite the high need to conclude a commercial employment contract, the legislation of the Russian Federation does not clearly and fully regulate the conditions for the conclusion, execution and termination of this type of contract. It requires greater attention from the legislator in order to make it easier for the State to monitor these legal relations and for citizens to be more protected when concluding and terminating a contract.
|Автор выражает признательность Уральскому государственному экономическому университету за оказанную помощь при написании статьи.||The author expresses gratitude to the Ural State Economic University for the assistance provided in writing the article.|
|Конфликт интересов||Conflict of Interest|
|Не указан.||None declared.|
Список литературы / References
- Брагинский М.И. Договорное право Договоры о передаче имущества : в 2 т.; / М.И. Брагинский – М.: Статут, 2017. – 2 т.
- Ткаченко С.В. Гражданское право: Учебное пособие: Договоры социального и коммерческого найма жилого помещения / С.В. Ткаченко, А.В. Кудряшов – Самара: Интер, 2015. – 370 c.
- Крашенинников П.В. Жилищное право: Учебник / П.В. Крашенинников – М.: Проспект, 2018. – 406 c.
- Крашенинников П.В. Постатейный комментарий к Жилищному кодексу Российской Федерации / П.В. Крашенинников – М.: Статут, 2014. – 660 c.
- Формакидов Д.А. Актуальные вопросы правового регулирования договора коммерческого найма жилого помещения. / Д.А. Формакидов // Журнал российского права. – 2017. – 5. – c. 55-63.
- Ковалева О.А. Договор аренды жилого помещения в России и Германии. Сравнительный анализ. / О.А. Ковалева // Семейное и жилищное право. – 2021. – 2. – c. 42-44.
- Воронецкий П.М. Договор коммерческого найма жилого помещения: проблемы правового регулирования. / П.М. Воронецкий // Российская юстиция. – 2015. – 2. – c. 11-14.
- Бобровская О.Н. Договор коммерческого найма: перспективы развития. / О.Н. Бобровская // Современное право. – 2010. – 2. – c. 51-54.
- Карпухин Д.В. Коммерческий наем жилого помещения: особенности расторжения договора. / Д.В. Карпухин, Л.Б. Забелова // Жилищное право. – 2010. – 7. – c. 45-51.
- Кириченко О.В. Цена как существенное условие договора коммерческого найма жилого помещения. / О.В. Кириченко // Юрист. – 2011. – 16. – c. 72-76.
Список литературы на английском языке / References in English
- Braginskij M.I. Dogovornoe pravo [Contract Law] Property Transfer Contracts: in 2 vol.; / M.I. Braginskij – M.: Statut, 2017. – 2 vol. [in Russian]
- Tkachenko S.V. Grazhdanskoe pravo: Uchebnoe posobie: Dogovory' social'nogo i kommercheskogo najma zhilogo pomeshheniya [Civil Law: Training Manual: Contracts of Social and Commercial Employment of Residential Premises] / V. Tkachenko, A.V. Kudryashov – Samara: Inter, 2015. – 370 p. [in Russian]
- Krasheninnikov P.V. Zhilishhnoe pravo: Uchebnik [Housing law: Textbook] / P.V. Krasheninnikov – M.: Prospekt, 2018. – 406 p. [in Russian]
- Krasheninnikov P.V. Postatejny'j kommentarij k Zhilishhnomu kodeksu Rossijskoj Federacii [Post-article commentary on the Housing Code of the Russian Federation] / P.V. Krasheninnikov – M.: Statut, 2014. – 660 p. [in Russian]
- Formakidov D.A. Aktual'ny'e voprosy' pravovogo regulirovaniya dogovora kommercheskogo najma zhilogo pomeshheniya [Topical issues of legal regulation of the contract of commercial hiring of residential premises]. / A. Formakidov // Zhurnal rossijskogo prava [Journal of Russian law]. – 2017. – 5. – p. 55-63. [in Russian]
- Kovaleva O.A. Dogovor arendy' zhilogo pomeshheniya v Rossii i Germanii. Sravnitel'ny'j analiz [Residential lease agreement in Russia and Germany. Comparative analysis]. / O.A. Kovaleva // Semejnoe i zhilishhnoe pravo [Family and housing law]. – 2021. – 2. – p. 42-44. [in Russian]
- Voroneczkij P.M. Dogovor kommercheskogo najma zhilogo pomeshheniya: problemy' pravovogo regulirovaniya [Contract of Commercial Hiring of Residential Premises: Problems of Legal Regulation]. / P.M. Voroneczkij // Rossijskaya yusticiya [Russian Justice]. – 2015. – 2. – p. 11-14. [in Russian]
- Bobrovskaya O.N. Dogovor kommercheskogo najma: perspektivy' razvitiya [Commercial Employment Contract: Development Prospects]. / O.N. Bobrovskaya // Sovremennoe pravo [Modern Law]. – 2010. – 2. – p. 51-54. [in Russian]
- Karpuxin D.V. Kommercheskij naem zhilogo pomeshheniya: osobennosti rastorzheniya dogovora [Commercial hiring of residential premises: features of contract termination]. / D.V. Karpuxin, L.B. Zabelova // Zhilishhnoe pravo [Housing law]. – 2010. – 7. – p. 45-51. [in Russian]
- Kirichenko O.V. Cena kak sushhestvennoe uslovie dogovora kommercheskogo najma zhilogo pomeshheniya [Price as a material condition of the contract of commercial hire of residential premises]. / O.V. Kirichenko // Yurist [Lawyer]. – 2011. – 16. – p. 72-76. [in Russian]