As the materials of the case, in 2017, JSC “Russian glass company” from St. Petersburg has been fined in Moscow on 300 thousand rubles for violation of article 8.25 “Placement of vehicles in the territory occupied by vegetation” of the Metropolitan code of administrative offences. To challenge the fine in court “RAC” failed, because the reduction provided only for administrative offenses, responsibility for which is established by section II “Special part” of the administrative code.
constitutional court explained the norm of the law on information of a material nature
According to the Complainant, such law enforcement practice contradicts a number of provisions of the Constitution, including the principle of equality before the law and the courts.
– Approved the court’s interpretation creates differentiation in the legal position of individuals, which is incompatible with article 19 of the Constitution and is not consistent with the constitutional meaningful goals possible restrictions on rights and freedoms of man and citizen (article 55), said representatives of the RSK in the complaint.The constitutional court generally agreed with the arguments of the applicant.
the constitutional court recalled that in 2016 already confirmed the possibility of individualization of administrative punishment that “actually improves the legal status of a legal entity, brought to administrative responsibility”. While the administrative code provides the possibility for imposition of penalty on citizens and legal entities for violations stipulated by the legislation, not only nationwide, but also the legislation of subjects of the Russian Federation. However, article 4.1 does not contain instructions for such differentiation, which is contrary to the Constitution. The Federal legislator prescribed to correct this omission.
the Article does not allow to assess a penalty below the lowest PRAdela for violation of the law of the RF subject
– This differentiation gives rise to – in violation of the constitutional principles of equality and justice, extending its influence as the legislative regulation of the rights and freedoms enshrined directly in the Constitution and the rights acquired under the law, – the conditions for discriminatory enforcement – referred to the COP on a number of his own decisions.
the Case of JSC “RSK” is subject to revision.
