Damage reputation. Compensation for damage to reputation: the Supreme Court indicated when it can be recovered from a legal entity

Photo by Pravo.Ru

On October 1, 2013, amendments to the Civil Code came into force, which prohibited legal entities from recovering compensation for moral damage. In March of this year, the Presidium of the Supreme Court that legal entities can protect their reputation by refuting published information and recovering damages. But the St. Petersburg University decided that it still has the right to a million-dollar compensation for damage caused to the business reputation of the university from a damning article in an online publication. The case reached the Supreme Court, which explained why the ban on legal entities from recovering compensation for moral damage does not prevent them from claiming compensation for damage that has been caused to the company's reputation.

Refutation is not enough to restore justice

Administration of St. Petersburg state university The trade unions were outraged by the publication of the local media - Zaks.ru. The note cited the position of the youth public organization"Spring", which accused the rector of the university Alexander Zapesotsky of violating the constitutional right of students to freedom of speech.

A year and a half after the publication, the University applied to the Arbitration Court of St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region with a claim for the protection of business reputation against the editors of the site and its founder (case No. А56-58502/2015). The applicant demanded that the following information be recognized as untrue and discrediting the business reputation of the university: "The administration of the St. Petersburg Humanitarian University of Trade Unions (SPbGUP) and the rector Alexander Zapesotsky violate Article 29 of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech to citizens". It was these words of representatives of the movement "Spring" quoted by the publication.

In addition, the plaintiff asked to oblige the defendant to remove the article from the publication's website, post a refutation and recover 1 million rubles from the media. as compensation for damage caused to the business reputation of the university.

The first instance recognized that the material discredits the business reputation of the university, but refused to recover a million in compensation. According to the court, the plaintiff did not provide evidence that confirms the real Negative consequences from a published article for the university's reputation. Judge Svetlana Astritskaya decided only to remove the controversial material from the publication's website, publish a refutation and collect 6,000 rubles in favor of the university. for state duty.

The appeal came to a different conclusion and satisfied the plaintiff's claims in full. In its decision, the appellate instance referred to the fact that not only the authors of the statements, but also those who disseminated this information can act as defendants in such disputes (paragraph 5 of the Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of February 24, 2005 No. 3 "On judicial practice in cases of protection of the honor and dignity of citizens, as well as the business reputation of citizens and legal entities"). The Arbitration Court of the North-Western District overturned the decision of the appeal and upheld the act of first instance.

VS: "Legal entities can compensate for reputational damage"

The university disagreed with the district court's decision and appealed it to the Supreme Court in order to uphold the act of appeal. Lawyer Alexander Makarov from AB "Reznik, Gagarin and Partners", representing the interests of the plaintiff, at the hearing assured that in the process there was a substitution of concepts: "The courts pointed out that the plaintiff had no right to compensation for moral damage, but the applicant asked for something else - to compensate for reputational damage, the content of which differs from the first" .

The lawyer emphasized that Art. 152 of the Civil Code ("Protection of honor, dignity and business reputation") in the current wording does not exclude penalties in favor of legal entity reputational non-material damage. The Supreme Court then refused the applicant, leaving in force the acts of the first instance and the district court. Thus, the media will not have to pay millions in compensation (see).

In its act, the Supreme Court points out that the ban on legal entities from recovering compensation for moral damage does not prevent them from claiming compensation for damage that has been caused to the company's reputation. In support of their position, the judges of the Supreme Court refer to the Ruling of the Constitutional Court dated December 4, 2003 No. 508-O: "The absence of a direct indication in the law on the method of protecting the business reputation of legal entities does not deprive them of the right to make claims for compensation for losses, including non-material ones, caused by the loss of business reputation, or non-material harm that has its own content".

The Judicial Collegium for Economic Disputes of the Supreme Court explains why it refused to satisfy the requirements of the university: the plaintiff did not prove a certain level of his business reputation and its belittling.

Pravo.ru experts: "In essence, the dispute was resolved correctly"

Dmitry Seregin, Counsel law firm"YUST", explains that in the Civil Code, moral harm refers mainly to physical and moral suffering: "In this sense, moral harm cannot really be caused to a legal entity." However, damage to business reputation should be distinguished from moral damage, for example, a decrease in confidence in a legal entity due to the dissemination of defamatory information, Seregin emphasizes: “In this case, the affected legal entity may demand compensation for losses, but for this it must prove the fact of their occurrence, connection with undermining their reputation and justify the size".

Anatoly Semyonov, public ombudsman for the protection of the rights of entrepreneurs in the field of intellectual property, considers the reference of the Supreme Court to the decision of the Constitutional Court controversial. In his opinion, the Constitutional Court, in its ruling, did not point to the admissibility of applying "compensation for moral damage" by analogy, but to the possibility of demanding "compensation for damages." The word "compensation" in this context does not mean a special sanction, but is a synonym for "compensation" or "recovery", the lawyer believes. Semyonov doubts that the position of the Constitutional Court in this case can overcome the direct indication of the law and create a new category of "intangible losses."

Pavel Khlyustov, Lawyer, Partner at Barshchevsky & Partners, I am sure that the dispute was resolved correctly on the merits, but the legal justification for the stated claim as intangible damages is incorrect. Any statements that, by its legal nature, compensation for moral damage to a legal entity refers to some kind of "non-material losses", the expert considers doubtful, given the lack of a relevant provision in the current legislation. In addition, we should not forget that the recovery of moral harm or non-pecuniary damage by its legal nature is a measure of legal liability, Khlyustov explains: "The latter can only occur for those acts that are recognized as offenses by the law in force at the time they were committed (Article 54 constitution)". The speaker recalls that a legal entity can claim damages for damages caused to its business reputation, using the rules on the recovery of damages: "And not the provisions that regulate compensation for moral damage, or "intangible damages" that cut the ears of every lawyer.

Protection of honor, dignity and business reputation — a procedure aimed at restoring a person's good name. Everyone has such a right in the event of harm as a result of the disclosure of discrediting information that does not correspond to reality. Read more about ways to protect honor and dignity in this article.

Protection of the honor and dignity of a citizen

Protection of honor and good name is the constitutional right of every Russian, regardless of age, gender, nationality, official position and other characteristics. This provision is enshrined in article 23 of the country's basic law and is duplicated by many regulatory legal acts. In particular, Article 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation guarantees citizens judicial protection of honor, dignity and business reputation.

What is honor, dignity and business reputation?

• honor - an assessment of a person from the point of view of its perception by society, based on the social and spiritual qualities of a person;
• dignity, on the contrary, means self-esteem, that is, a person's idea of ​​himself as a person and an assessment of his own value;
• business reputation is a category that applies mainly to legal entities, but is also fair for citizens in terms of recognizing professional and personal qualities person in the aggregate.

How can damage to the honor and dignity of a citizen be expressed?

As follows from the provision of Article 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, harm to honor, dignity or business reputation consists in the dissemination of discrediting information about a person. How such information is disseminated is irrelevant.

The main condition for the emergence of the right to protect honor, dignity and business reputation is the discrepancy between the disclosed information and reality.

Important: the obligation to prove the accuracy of the information lies with the person who disseminated it. At the same time, in this case, the principle of the presumption of innocence is fully in force, that is, discrediting information is considered a priori false until the opposite is proven in court or otherwise. statutory okay.

A typical example is the disclosure of information that reveals a person to have committed a crime. In such a situation, despite the obviousness of the correctness of the disseminator of information, without a court conviction that has entered into force, it is regarded as untrue.

Ways to protect honor, dignity and business reputation

Civil law protection of honor (as well as dignity and business reputation) implies 2 types of consequences of its application:

• public refutation of discrediting information;
• compensation for moral harm caused to a citizen as a result of the dissemination of false information about him.

At the same time, one does not exclude the other, that is, the court, depending on the specific circumstances, has the right to apply both sanctions to the violator.

How to ensure compensation for moral damage?

If in order to achieve a refutation of discrediting information, it is enough to prove their falsity, then compensation for moral harm is allowed only if the victim is inflicted with physical or moral suffering.

In the case of encroachments on honor and dignity, we can only talk about moral suffering, which is very difficult to confirm and even more so evaluate. The wording of the legislation on this matter is very vague and does not answer the question of how exactly the existence of suffering should be proved.

Don't know your rights?

In particular, article 1101 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation names as criteria for assessing moral damage:

• the nature of moral suffering;
• the degree of guilt of the person who caused them;
• circumstances of violation of rights;
• personality traits of the affected person.

A certain clarity is introduced by the resolution of the plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation “Some questions of the application of legislation on compensation for moral damage” No. 10 of 20.12.1994. The document indicates that moral harm may include, among other things, feelings associated with the loss of a job, the inability to continue the previous lifestyle, etc.

As shows arbitrage practice, as a loss of the opportunity to continue the usual way of life, various circumstances can be regarded, such as: exclusion from any public associations; refusal of the environment of the victim to communicate with him, etc. - all this often takes place as a result of the spread of false defamatory information.

As for the compensation itself, according to Article 151 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, it can be expressed exclusively in monetary form. The amount depends on the degree of harm caused and is determined by the court based on the requirements of the victim. There are no restrictions, as well as a single position of the courts on this matter.

In other words, the victim has the right to claim any amount in the claim, but this does not mean that the court will appoint it for payment in full.

Important: you can apply to the court for the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation in terms of compensation for moral harm at any time: by virtue of Article 208 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the statute of limitations does not apply to claims relating to the protection of personal non-property rights.

The procedure for refuting false information

In accordance with Article 151 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, false information must be refuted in the same way in which it was disseminated. In addition, the norm contains several clarifying provisions:

• in case of disclosure of discrediting information in the media, in addition to a refutation, the victim has the right to demand the publication of his opinion or response there;
• documents containing defamatory information are subject to revocation or cancellation (the provision applies to documents from specific organizations, for example, orders, orders, etc.);
• in case of impossibility to report a refutation to general information due to the widespread dissemination of false information, the victim can count on its removal from all sources and blocking further distribution by any means, including the destruction of material media;
• when defamatory information is disseminated on the Internet, at the request of the victim, they are subject to removal, followed by the publication of a refutation.

Important: the inability to identify the person who disseminated false information does not deprive the victim of the right to defend his honor, dignity and business reputation. In such situations, he may apply to the court with a demand to recognize such information as untrue and to stop the publication of refuting materials in the public domain.

Unlike claims for damages, claims to retract defamatory information are subject to a general statute of limitations, which is 3 years from the moment the victim became aware of the violation of his rights.

The exceptions are lawsuits related to the publication of false information in the media - here interested parties should hurry, because the limitation period in this case is limited to 1 year from the date of publication of discrediting information.

Other forms of protection of honor, dignity and business reputation

Protection of honor, dignity and business reputation, in addition to civil, is guaranteed by the norms of criminal and administrative law.

Thus, the humiliation of a person's honor and dignity, if these actions are expressed in an indecent form, are qualified as an insult and punished in accordance with Article 5.61 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation.

The amount of fines provided for by the norm varies from 1,000 to 5,000 rubles, depending on the circumstances of the insult.

The dissemination of defamatory information is completely covered by the Criminal Code - Article 128.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation establishes liability for slander. And although the perpetrator does not face imprisonment, the consequences are nevertheless very serious - a large (up to 5,000,000 rubles) fine or compulsory work for a long time.

If desired, the victim of slander may use any method of protecting honor, dignity and business reputation, or apply them all at once. All that is needed for this is to apply to the justice of the peace with a statement about bringing the perpetrator to justice. criminal liability. Compensation for non-pecuniary damage and the refutation of false information can be achieved within the framework of a criminal case - the judge will make an appropriate decision simultaneously with the decision of the verdict.

Important: the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation is a right guaranteed not only during the life of a citizen, but also after his death. In this case, the relatives of the deceased victim or other interested persons can implement it. Some difficulties may arise only if the descendants wish to receive compensation for moral harm - it is allowed only in relation to persons who have directly suffered suffering.

Protecting the business reputation of a legal entity is not a new category in Russian law, but there are still many questions about it. The situation is simplified by the fact that cases are considered in part by arbitration courts. Their approach is usually considered to be more reasonable, and general courts are forced to align themselves with arbitration courts.

The legislative framework

A whole list of articles in the Constitution mentions the right of citizens and organizations to personal dignity and reputation (Articles 21, 23, 34, 45 and 46). The Basic Law obliges the use of the right to freedom of speech, acting reasonably and with discretion, and submits such disputes to the jurisdiction of the court.

Civil Code reveals the provisions of the Constitution on the business reputation and dignity of the individual and describes the means of protection and the mechanism for their application.

How to proceed is mentioned in the section on intangible benefits and in part in the section on redress.

As clarifications, one can refer to a number of resolutions of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the infliction of moral harm, the actual protection of the business reputation of organizations, the application of the norms of the Constitution, etc.

Disputes about the violation of non-material benefits are mentioned in other resolutions of the Plenum, in particular on the application of the provisions of international treaties and the Basic Law of the country.

Periodically, the courts of the regional level conduct a generalization of practice, its results are regularly published. Similar reviews were issued by the RF Armed Forces in 2007 and 2016.

Reference should be made to international treaties and acts affecting the right to protect business reputation.

A special position is occupied by the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights, which is the basis for the activities of the ECtHR. Russian courts, in particular the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the acts of this court, adopted against the Russian Federation and other countries party to the Convention, are actively applied.

It is difficult to find a topic so extensively discussed by representatives of the judiciary as the protection of the honor and business reputation of a legal entity.

Changes in legislation in 2013

The accumulated judicial practice has made it possible to amend the Civil Code, expanding the possibilities for protecting the honor and business reputation of a legal entity. What are they?

• the court has the right to establish the fact of violation of non-property rights and publish its decision;
• if the refutation is not enough, the court has the right to oblige other persons to delete the relevant information;
• use as a measure of protection the seizure of material media with discrediting information, and its destruction without compensation to the owner of the media;
• prohibit the dissemination of any information that does not correspond to reality, and is not of an exclusively vicious nature.

Changes in the legislation have led to the fact that the protection of the business reputation of a legal entity is based on Article 150 of the Civil Code. It lists the methods and means of protecting business reputation.

Some features of the protection of legal entities

The practice of applying legislation in this area shows that, on the one hand, the business reputation of individuals and legal entities has the same status. But we must not forget about some of the nuances.

The reputation of an organization may be transferred to a successor as a result of a merger, division or reorganization. If the owner of the enterprise changes as a result of the transaction, goodwill passes along with all rights.

But this applies only to commercial organizations. Simply put, buyers evaluate a product by remembering the brand or other designation that allows them to identify it with a particular manufacturer. So the case for the protection of the business reputation of a legal entity can be initiated either by the successor or the new owner of the organization.

In general, the legislator maintains the unity of legislation regulating the status of citizens and organizations, excluding the occurrence of unnecessary conflicts.

Reputation as an intangible good

The Civil Code mentions the dignity and business reputation of a person several times. The first time - in the part equating the owners of this good: people and organizations, the second - in the provisions on simple partnership, the third - in the clauses on the commercial concession agreement.

As a punishment for administrative violations, it is forbidden to choose measures that would somehow affect how buyers and partners evaluate the goods and services of the punished organization.

One of the signs of unfair competition is the dissemination of discrediting, distorting reality or other information that adversely affects the evaluation of goods or services of a competing company by third parties.

It is not for nothing that the legislation calls some of the benefits intangible, they do not have an exact monetary value, and it always remains approximate. Both the legislator and judicial practice in fact, it is recognized that a violation, in particular, of goodwill cannot be fully compensated. Thanks to this, the protection of the business reputation of a legal entity remains open. So how is reputation measured?

Assessment of infringement of rights in material terms

What are they guided by in terms of settlements when initiating cases to protect the business reputation of a legal entity?

It is part of intangible assets in accordance with the Accounting Rules as amended on December 27, 2007, order 153n. The assessment is made on the basis of the premium that the buyer is willing to pay when purchasing goods from a particular manufacturer.

The assessment also includes lost profits, those contracts that could have been concluded. The information in connection with which is submitted must have a direct impact on the plaintiff's business activities. A mere statement that the defendant's actions caused damages is not sufficient.

Material circumstances

Judicial practice for the protection of the business reputation of a legal entity obliges the court to clarify the following points:

• whether there was a fact of dissemination of information;
• whether these facts took place in reality;
• whether the information was damaging.

Information is considered to be widely disseminated if it is published through the press, the Internet, or through oral or writing. This also includes statements in public, in front of a mass of people. It is enough to disclose information even to one person.

Under the second point, it is clarified whether the event took place, whether the plaintiff had anything to do with it, and whether it took place at the time indicated in the disputed information.

Information is considered defamatory if it alleges a violation. current legislation, in particular the rules of competition, business ethics, business practices and other actions that are negative in nature and can affect the reputation.

It should be noted that the dissemination of information that is not true, but not recognized as defamatory, can also be the subject of legal proceedings under the 2013 amendments. Otherwise, by confusing similar concepts due to misunderstanding, the plaintiff runs the risk of losing the case, which is justified.

What does not fall under the defamatory and inaccurate information

Judicial practice for the protection of the business reputation of a legal entity excludes the following statements or information from falling under the definition of discrediting information.

From the point of view of the law, statements made by a specific person may be in the nature of a value judgment and represent an exclusively personal opinion of a person about an event. They cannot be verified for their existence in reality.

If the information makes a statement about facts or events that have taken place, it cannot be perceived as a value judgment.

So far, the courts have not been able to fully distinguish between a statement of fact and a judgment. Especially in cases where the participants are engaged in political activities.

Thus, having negative statements addressed to him, including those using profanity, the plaintiff runs the risk of facing the court accepting this information as a judgment. However, the fate of the claim depends on the level of literacy of the position developed by the lawyer representing the defendant and the explanations that the defendant will give.

border with slander

Proceedings to protect the business reputation of individuals and legal entities often involve defamation, which is an act falling under the provisions of the articles of the Criminal Code.

What is the difference between them? Slander is a deliberate lie, and the person who is the distributor understood that it actually did not correspond to reality.

In practice, it is almost never possible to prove libel, i.e., a deliberate, deliberate lie, which is why a lot of cases of this kind are considered within the framework of civil and arbitration proceedings.

Moral injury

Since the 1990s, the question has been raised of how the protection of the business reputation of a legal entity and moral damage are combined. For a long time, the courts could not fully formulate their opinion on this issue.

In 2013 in Art. 152 of the Civil Code amended. In particular, in the last paragraph of the indicated article, a reservation is made that measures aimed at protecting honor and dignity also apply to organizations. An exception is established in relation to the recovery of moral damages.

Why is that? Moral harm is the suffering and feelings of a person in connection with the wrongful actions of the defendant. In addition, the law gives the organization the right to recover damages, which the average citizen cannot count on.

By this, those who wish to protect the business reputation of a legal entity from defamation (spread of lies) are not infringed, but equalized with citizens in terms of protection. How correct the position is is another question, especially since the ECHR has repeatedly referred to compensation for non-material damage to the organization.

Claim structure

The claim is drawn up in accordance with the requirements of procedural legislation. There is some difference between applications to arbitration and general court. The sample business reputation claim is usually designed to accommodate this difference.

The document is compiled according to the following scheme:

• the name of the court;
• information about the plaintiff (full name of the organization and location according to founding documents and entries in the Unified State Register of Legal Entities, as well as full name. and actual address of residence);
• similar information about the defendant (the author of the material, or its distributor, or both);
• similar information about a third party (one whose rights are still affected by the lawsuit, for example, an employee who disseminated information using official position);
• the circumstances that forced the claim to be filed with the court (all three components described above);
• norms on legislation, references to clarifications of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and Resolutions of the Plenums;
• arguments and references to evidence supporting the position of the plaintiff;
• requirements (what exactly the plaintiff asks the court to do to protect his rights);
• a list of attached documents or evidence of their sending to the defendant along with a copy of the claim, if the materials have been submitted to the arbitration court;
• signature and date of filing.

The statute of limitations for applying to the court is 12 months from the date of publication of the materials.

If a representative is acting by proxy, a copy of it is attached. Attached is a copy of the document confirming the authority official who signed the claim or power of attorney for representation.

The practice of applying to the courts shows that sometimes samples are not enough to prepare a claim for the protection of the business reputation of a legal entity. It is advisable to involve a specialist with experience in this field.

In which court is the claim filed?

Claims for the protection of the business reputation of a legal entity are considered by courts of both general jurisdiction and arbitration. How is the jurisdiction of the courts determined?

If the information disputed by the entrepreneur or commercial organization does not relate to entrepreneurial activity, the case is heard by the district court in the first instance.

This is the case, for example, with lawyers, whose activities are not considered business under the law. This also includes organizations or legal entities that are not engaged in entrepreneurship.

Commercial activity or entrepreneurship is the provision of services or the sale of goods for the purpose of distributing profits among the participants or founders of the organization. If such activity takes place, but its result is aimed at providing activities, for example, paying utilities, lease, organization cannot be assigned the status of a merchant.

Claims about the reputation of authorities or institutions performing public functions, in particular the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation, the MFC, etc., are not accepted by the courts. The motivation lies in the fact that such persons perform administrative and managerial functions.

If the dispute does not affect the plaintiff's economic activities, but rather is governed by labor law, it should be dealt with in a general court.

If information is disseminated about the quality of goods and services, violations of the rules of business ethics (everything that was mentioned above about unfair competition), then the application for the protection of the business reputation of a legal entity falls within the competence of arbitration justice.

Applicable evidence

Video materials, newspaper issues may not be stored in the archives, and the plaintiff has the right to present any evidence supporting the claim. For example, testimonies of witnesses who watched the program, copies of programs or materials posted on the Internet. This includes the program guide or other channel announcements about the release time of the relevant material.

In this case, in a case on the protection of the business reputation of a legal entity, the court will accept as evidence a certificate from an organization monitoring the activities of the media. It will serve as confirmation of the fact of the release of the program and its content.

In addition, the plaintiffs use the services of notaries who record the fact that information is located on the page on the Internet in preparation for the trial, so that the owner does not have time to delete the information.

In the arbitration process, the circumstances confirmed in the course of the exercise by the notary of his powers do not need additional confirmation. There is no similar provision in the CPC.

How is proof built?

General rule states that each party is obliged to prove the circumstances to which it refers. The described category of cases provides for some exceptions, in particular, the defendant is obliged to prove the validity of the information disseminated by him.

As mentioned above, the assessment of the circumstances of the case is given on three points:

• the fact of distribution;
• information is not true;
• information is damaging.

In its review, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation refers to the need for an examination. It is assigned to identify the significance of the effect of the dissemination of actions by the defendant, to identify plagiarism on the part of the plaintiff and whether the statements are discrediting.

If no assessment is given on the above points or an examination is not carried out, the risk of overturning decisions is significantly increased.

Difficulties of proof

First, it is difficult to prove a connection between the damage and the actions of the defendant. Economic activity is fundamentally risk-based, and it is difficult to tie stock drops or contract terminations or customer refusals to purchase goods or services to defamatory information.

It should be noted that the protection of the business reputation of a legal entity from a citizen is built according to the same rules and does not have any specifics.

In conclusion - about the claims

Protecting the business reputation of a legal entity provides a wide range of ways to influence the defendant. The law provides for the following options:

• the imposition of an obligation by the court to disseminate the refutation in the same way that the original information was disseminated;
• refutation of information through the media should be done in the press that disseminated the information;
• a document issued by an organization is subject to cancellation or is instead issued new document with denials;
• to oblige the perpetrators to delete the information and (or) to oblige the suppression of its further distribution, as well as to oblige the authorities to seize the material carriers of such information and destroy them without compensation to the owner;
• if the information is disseminated on the Internet, the plaintiff has the right to demand that the information be deleted and the refutation disseminated in a manner that would facilitate its dissemination;
• it is allowed to ask the court to establish the fact that the information does not correspond to reality.

The plaintiff must choose one or more methods that best suit his circumstances and most adequately protect the business reputation of the legal entity.

Business reputation commercial organization- this is the prevailing opinion about it in society. positive image company is prerequisite successful entrepreneurship.

Civil law classifies the business reputation of a legal entity as an intangible benefit and guarantees judicial protection in case of damage to it. The purpose of protection is to restore a good name and compensate for property losses that have arisen due to infringement of reputation.

What is damage to business reputation?

Damage business image organization consists in forming a negative opinion among others about its activities, creating a negative image.

The consequences of this can be expressed in the loss of consumer interest in the company's products among customers, the loss of partner confidence, the loss of new counterparties and, as a result, a decrease in profits.

From the standpoint of the law, damage to the company's reputation can be caused by the dissemination of untrue defamatory information. To obtain judicial protection, all three circumstances in the aggregate are necessary. Let's analyze them in detail.

Information about the organization must be expressed in the form of defamatory statements.

The defamatory nature may consist of accusations of illegal activities, bribes of leaders, reports of debts, bankruptcy, infringement of the rights of clients and other similar statements. As a rule, the defamatory connotation of information is understandable, for example, when reporting in an article about wage arrears. But in difficult cases, establishing depravity will require a forensic linguistic examination, designed to determine whether the published fact spoils the reputation.

At the same time, negative information should be disseminated in the form of statements - solid statements about something.

For example, a message in an article on the website of an online publication about the violation by the rector of one of the universities of St. -ES16-8923).

Conversely, statements containing an assessment, suggestion, or personal opinion are not statements and, accordingly, are not considered to be harmful to the commercial image. Judicial practice in cases of business reputation has developed a criterion by which statements and opinions are distinguished: the first can be checked for compliance with reality, the second cannot. Thus, unfortunately for many entrepreneurs, the author of a private point of view cannot be held accountable, even if his statement influences public opinion due to its authority. For example, criticism of the quality of food in a restaurant, expressed by a popular blogger on his Internet channel, will not be recognized as defamatory information.

Note that situations are subject to equal judicial protection when a negative was expressed about the activities of the organization as a whole, as well as about its management, employees, business owners, and even about a trademark.

The published information must not be true.

That is, in general, the information must be false. At the same time, the veracity of the published circumstances must be proved by the author of the message himself.

However, if it is proved in court that the facts and events did take place in reality, the company will not receive protection, even if they really could affect the reputation.

For example, the organization filed a lawsuit against the editorial office of the newspaper to recognize the fact described in the article about the company's large debts for electricity as discrediting business reputation. The editors won the court, documenting the existence of a two million debt of the company to the electricity supplier (Resolution of the AC of the North-Western District of November 30, 2016 N Ф07-8523 / 2016).

Information deteriorating the business image should be disseminated.

The established judicial practice in cases of protection of reputation determines that the dissemination of information is its communication to at least one (!) person.

In reality, defamatory messages that cause controversy are most often published in newspapers, on websites and Internet forums, expressed on radio, television and in live performances, and also written in official letters.

Modern courts do not refer to the dissemination of a statement in government bodies- the prosecutor's office, the police, the president - even if in reality the unfavorable circumstances described did not exist.

Thus, the court denied the company a lawsuit for the protection of business reputation brought against the organization that wrote a complaint to the prosecutor's office about the violation by the plaintiff of commercial activities sanitary standards when using land plots. The refusal was justified by the fact that the defendant organization applied to the prosecutor's office exercising its right to appeal to state bodies, which is not the dissemination of information (Decree of the Arbitration Court of the North-Western District of December 23, 2015 in case N A56-87641 / 2014).

Ways to protect business reputation

The main way to restore the good name of the company, according to the law, is the obligation of the author to refute the disseminated information. At the same time, the culprit must refute it in the same way as he expressed it - in the same media, in a letter, on the Internet.

In addition to a rebuttal, the affected firm has the right to publish a response to the false accusation in the same source.

If the criticism of the company was contained in an official document, for example, in business letter, such document is subject to revocation.

In order to prevent further dissemination of negative information and provided that the refutation cannot be widely publicized, the company has the right to demand that information be removed from public access in the media and the Internet. In extreme cases, even the destruction of material carriers of information is allowed: copies of newspapers, magazines, leaflets.

In the event that the author of the slander could not be identified (especially true for information on the Internet), the law gives the injured organization the right to demand in court that the defamatory information be recognized as untrue.

The most demanded right of a legal entity with a discredited reputation is the ability to claim damages, but only along with a refutation.

We emphasize that losses can be recovered from the author of the information - actual or projected financial losses, and not moral harm, which implies mental suffering exclusively of a person, but not of an organization. In practice, a company can sue monetary losses from a slanderer, but for this it is necessary to prove a direct connection between their occurrence and the dissemination of critical information.

Where to apply to protect the business reputation of the organization?

Disputes about the protection of the commercial image are considered by the judiciary. The statement of claim for the protection of business reputation must be sent to the arbitration court. For the preparation of documents and representation in the proceedings, it is better to hire an arbitration lawyer.

The statute of limitations for applying for a refutation and recovery of reputational damage is not established by law. The exceptions are lawsuits against the media - they can be held liable within a year from the date of publication of a negative message.

Every person who is a citizen of Russia has the right to protection of honor and his good name. These words are spelled out by the letter of the law in the Constitution of the Russian Federation and, therefore, are sacredly and unconditionally executed by law enforcement, supervisory and judicial authorities of the country and are taken into account in federal laws and by-laws. However, in practice, the protection of the honor, dignity and business reputation of a citizen becomes a more complex process than the high-flown maxims of the fundamental law of the Russian Federation.

Business reputation individual is a combination of personal and professional characteristics person, the prevailing opinion about the subject civil law relations. According to Article 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, along with business reputation, the law also protects the honor and dignity of its citizens. Honor should be understood as a set of moral, moral and spiritual qualities of a person, and dignity - a person's conscious perception of his own value. Infringement of any of the above intangible rights is strictly punishable by law.

How is damage to honor and dignity determined?

Violation of a citizen's right to honor, dignity and business reputation takes place if the reliability of this information is affected. The dissemination by a certain person of information discrediting you in various ways is a sufficient basis for your appeal to judicial system with the subsequent restoration of the lost right.

According to Article 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, in the framework of the civil process in this case, the burden of proving that the disseminated information is reliable will entirely lie with the subject who deliberately launched it into free access. A citizen whose business reputation has been hurt does not need to prove the unreliability of the disclosed information.

How to restore business reputation?

Among the ways to protect honor, dignity and business reputation in civil law, the following methods are used:

• refutation of the stated information;
• recovery from the proper defendant of compensation for the moral damage that was caused to the citizen.

Refutation false information possibly in several forms, depending on the manner in which the defamatory information was disseminated. However, regardless of the method, the refutation must be carried out publicly. In particular, the dissemination of information in the media is subject to refutation in the same sources, indicating the opinion of the person whose rights were violated. On the Internet, false information is subject to blocking and removal from all available sources. Documentation containing false information, is subject to recall and withdrawal from the document flow of the organization or structural unit.

How to evaluate the business reputation of an individual?

When applying with a well-written statement of claim to the Magistrate's Court demanding the recovery of compensation for moral damage, you need to be prepared for the fact that it is you who will have to prove your suffering and justify the required amount of compensation. The legislation does not establish either a limitation period or the maximum amount of compensation to be collected in relation to an infringement on honor and dignity. Compensation is always in the form of money.

Among the main criteria for non-pecuniary damage, Art. 1101 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation indicates:

• degree of guilt of the offender;
• the nature of the resulting physical and moral suffering of the victim;
• justice and reasonableness;
• individual characteristics of the personality of the victim and the circumstances of the harm.

Based on the practice of the courts, the amount of compensation to be recovered, as a rule, corresponds to that indicated in the application, provided that it complies with the principles of reasonableness. However, it will be necessary to answer the court a number of questions regarding the moral suffering that has arisen, and, if possible, to confirm them with documents.

Criminal and administrative ways to protect lost business reputation

In addition to civil law norms that protect the business reputation of a citizen, it is also possible to apply in this situation to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation.

Violation of honor and dignity in criminal law is called slander and is regulated by Article 128.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. As a punishment for such a crime, the courts use the use of fines and compulsory work in relation to the convict. It is also convenient that it is possible to recover non-pecuniary damage and obtain an order for refutation within the framework of one criminal process, if these requirements are indicated when filing an application with the court. And even despite the seeming insignificance of the punishment, one should not forget that malicious evasion from the execution of punishment can lead the convicted person to review it for a real term of imprisonment. Insult in the framework of administrative proceedings is regulated by Art. 5.61 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation and is punishable by an insignificant fine.

The right to use business reputation enables a citizen to protect his honor and dignity from an unlawful attempt on his good name, protect his personality from slander and insult and bring the perpetrator to justice with all the strictness of the current legislation.