Commentary to article 59. Compensation for damage caused by an administrative offense   The Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Administrative Offences  

     1. When considering a case of an administrative offense that has caused property damage, a judge, when deciding whether to impose an administrative penalty, simultaneously collects such damage if there is no dispute about its amount.

     Disputes about the amount of property damage caused by an administrative offense are considered in civil proceedings.

     2. Compensation for property damage in cases of administrative offenses considered by other authorized bodies (officials), in case the guilty person refuses his voluntary compensation, is carried out in civil proceedings.

     3. Claims for the protection of business reputation or compensation for moral damage caused by an administrative offense are considered in civil proceedings on the grounds provided for by the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

     An administrative offense may be accompanied by harm. In accordance with Article 6 of the Administrative Code, one of the main tasks of legislation on administrative offenses is to protect the legitimate interests of a person, citizen and organizations from administrative offenses.  

     In accordance with Part 4 of Article 40 of the Administrative Code, an administrative penalty is not a means of compensation for property damage. In this regard, the number of circumstances to be clarified by a judge, an authorized body (official) when considering a case of an administrative offense, includes a study of the issue of harm in the commission of an administrative offense. At the same time, it should be understood that the issue of compensation for damage is considered only in cases of adoption of an appropriate resolution and imposition of an administrative penalty on the perpetrator. In cases of termination of proceedings on an administrative offense, the issue of compensation for harm is not considered.

     Part 1. It is obvious that for the victim, the result of the consideration of an administrative offense case in the form of bringing the offender to administrative responsibility and imposing penalties on him is often not important. At the same time, every victim has the right and, as a rule, wants to receive compensation for the damage caused to him by an administrative offense. Therefore, in order to protect the rights of a victim who has suffered damage as a result of an administrative offense, in part Article 1 of the commented article establishes the rule that a judge, considering a case of an administrative offense, has the right, in the absence of a dispute, to simultaneously resolve the issue of compensation for property damage when deciding whether to impose an administrative penalty. This contributes to procedural savings.  

     At the same time, when resolving this issue, the judge is obliged to establish the causal relationship between an administrative offense and property damage, the guilt of the person in causing it, the extent of the damage, to whom it was inflicted, etc. After that, in the decision on a specific case of an administrative offense, specify the amount of damage to be reimbursed, the terms and procedure for its compensation.  

     However, if there is a dispute about the amount of property damage, it is considered in civil proceedings.

     Property damage caused to a victim as a result of committing an administrative offense (for example, damage to a car due to a traffic violation) is mostly minor (minor) damage, which, in fact, is justified by the absence of public danger. When making a decision on an administrative offense, the cost assessment of damage is often extremely important, since for a number of offenses, the cost of property damage is generally the basis for distinguishing offenses from criminal encroachments.

     Part 2 of the commented article provides for compensation for property damage exclusively in the order of civil proceedings, in case the guilty person refuses his voluntary compensation in cases of administrative offenses considered by authorized bodies (officials). Here, the legislator was guided by the principle of reasonableness. The refusal of voluntary compensation is interpreted as the presence of a dispute regarding the amount of damage or the terms and amount of compensation. Accordingly, such disputes should be considered in civil proceedings.

     Part 3 of the article in question regulates the issue of compensation for moral damage caused to a person by an administrative offense and the protection of business reputation, such an issue is considered only in civil proceedings on the grounds provided for by the Civil Code. At the same time, these issues are also regulated by the following regulatory decisions of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan: No. 7 dated November 27, 2015 "On the application by courts of legislation on compensation for moral damage" and December 18, 1992. No. 6 "On the application in judicial practice of legislation on the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation of individuals and legal entities."

     According to paragraph 1 of Article 951 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, moral harm is a violation, diminution or deprivation of personal non–property benefits and rights of individuals, including moral or physical suffering (humiliation, irritation, depression, anger, shame, despair, physical pain, inferiority, discomfort, etc.) experienced (endured experienced) by the victim as a result of an offense committed against him, and in the event of his death as a result of such an offense – by his close relatives, spouse.  

     Business reputation is understood as a stable positive assessment of a person's business (industrial, professional) merits by public opinion.

     A positive business reputation is associated with the positive attitude of counterparties towards its owner, with trust in him and confidence in the positive result of cooperation. A negative business reputation shows the instability of its owner's position in economic turnover, distrust of him on the part of counterparties.

Scientific and practical commentary to the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Administrative Offences (article-by-article) from the Author's team:

     Bachurin Sergey Nikolaevich, Candidate of Law, Associate Professor – chapter 48 (co-authored with E.M. Khakimov);

     Gabdualiev Mereke Trekovich, Candidate of Law – Chapters 11, 21, 22, 23;

     Zhusipbekova Ainur Maratovna, M.yu.n. – chapter 13 (co-authored with Karpekin A.V.); chapters 33, 39 (co-authored with Seitzhanov O.T.);  

     Alexander Vladimirovich Karpekin, Candidate of Law, Associate Professor – chapter 13 (in collaboration with A.M. Zhusipbekova);

     Korneychuk Sergey Vasilyevich – chapters 2; chapter 6 (co-authored with O.T. Seitzhanov, E.M. Khakimov); chapter 8; chapter 25 (co-authored with E.M. Khakimov); articles 457-470, 488, 488-1, 491-506; chapters 28, 30, 52;

     Ilya Petrovich Koryakin, Doctor of Law, Professor – Chapter 49;

     Kisykova Gulnara Bauyrzhanovna, Candidate of Law – chapter 20;

     Omarova Botagoz Akimgereevna, Candidate of Law – chapters 17; chapter 18 (co-authored with B.A. Parmankulova); chapters 26, 31; chapter 32 (co-authored with B.A. Parmankulova);

     Parmankulova Bayan Askhanbaevna – chapter 18 (co-authored with Omarova B.A.); chapters 19, 32 (co-authored with Omarova B.A.); chapter 43 (co-authored with Tukiev A.S.);  

     Podoprigora Roman Anatolyevich, Doctor of Law, Professor - Chapter 24, articles 489, 489-1, 490;

     Porokhov Evgeny Viktorovich, Doctor of Law – Chapters 14, 15, 16, 29, articles 471-475;

     Seitzhanov Olzhas Temirzhanovich, Candidate of Law, Associate Professor, – chapter 4; chapter 5 (co-authored with E. M. Khakimov); chapter 6 (co-authored with S.V. Korneychuk, E.M. Khakimov); chapter 9; chapter 10 (co-authored with B.E. Shaimerdenov, V.V. Filin); chapter 33 (co-authored with Zhusipbekova A.M.); chapter 36 (co-authored with Shaimerdenov B.E.); chapter 39 (co-authored with Zhusipbekova A.M.);

     Smyshlyaev Alexander Sergeevich, PhD. – chapters 38, 40, 42, 43-1 (co-authored with A.S. Tukiev); chapter 44;

     Aslan Sultanovich Tukiev - Candidate of Law, Associate Professor – chapters 1, 3, 35; chapters 38, 40, 42, (co-authored with A.S. Smyshlyaev); chapter 43 (co-authored with B.A. Parmankulova); chapter 43-1 (co-authored with A.S. Smyshlyaev); chapter 44-1 (co-authored with Shipp D.A.); chapter 45; 46 (co-authored with Shipp D.A.); chapter 47;  

     Filin Vladimir Vladimirovich, Candidate of Law, Associate Professor – Chapter 10 (in collaboration with O.T. Seitzhanov, B.E. Shaimerdenov);  

     Yerzhan Maratovich Khakimov, M.yu.n. – chapter 5 (co-authored with O.T. Seitzhanov); chapter 6 (co-authored with O.T. Seitzhanov, S.V. Korneychuk); chapter 7; chapter 25 (co-authored with S.V. Korneychuk); chapters 34, 41; chapter 48 (co-authored with S.N. Bachurin); chapter 53;

     Shaimerdenov Bolat Yerkenovich, M.yu.n., – chapter 10 (co-authored with O.T. Seitzhanov, V.V. Filin); chapter 12; articles 476-487, 507-509; chapter 36 (co-authored with O.T. Seitzhanov); chapters 37, 50, 51.  

     Shipp Denis Alekseevich – chapters 44-1, 46 (in collaboration with A.S. Tukiev).

Date of amendment of the act:  01.01.2020 Date of adoption of the act:  01.01.2020 Place of acceptance:  100050000000 Authority that adopted the act: 103001000000 Region of operation:  100000000000 NPA registration number assigned by the regulatory body:  5 Status of the act:  new Sphere of legal relations:  029000000000 / 028000000000 / 029002000000 / 028004000000 / 029001000000 / 026000000000 / 001000000000 / 001008000000 / 030000000000 The form of the act:  COMM / CODE Legal force:  1900 Language of the Act:  rus  

Attention!   

       Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.  

 For more information,  please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085. 

Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office  Court Cases