Unjust Enrichment in Russia: Recovering a Mistaken or Unsupported Payment

Under Article 1102 of the Russian Civil Code, a person who has acquired or saved property at another person's expense without a basis established by a law, another legal act or a transaction must return the property to the person at whose expense it was obtained. The rule applies to a transfer sent to the wrong account, an advance paid under a contract that was never signed, a payment made under a contract later declared invalid and many other cases. It does not apply to the situations listed in Article 1109, which are described below.

For a business or a private person abroad, this claim is often the only route when there is no valid contract to sue on. This guide explains the elements of a claim, the cases that cannot be recovered, how courts treat transfers made without a signed contract, how long the claimant has and what evidence should be saved.

Elements of the Claim

A court examines three questions: did the defendant receive or save property, did he do so at the claimant's expense and was there no legal basis. The claimant proves the first two with payment records, bank statements and delivery documents. The defendant has to show that a basis existed: a contract, a debt, a gift or another ground.

Article 1102(2) states that the rules apply whatever the cause of the enrichment: the actions of the recipient, of the injured person, of a third party or events that depend on nobody's will. A bank error and a mistaken instruction of a customer are covered in the same way.

The claim concerns money and other property. In the case of a thing, the claimant asks for its return in kind, which Article 1104 regulates, and if that is impossible, for its value. A separate Civil Code provision allows the claimant to demand income that the recipient received or should have received, and the details depend on the time at which the recipient learned that there was no basis.

Payments That Cannot Be Recovered: Article 1109

Article 1109 lists four groups of transfers that are not returned as unjust enrichment. Property handed over in performance of an obligation before the due date is not returned unless the obligation says otherwise. Property handed over to satisfy an obligation after the limitation period has expired is not returned.

Wages and equivalent payments, pensions, allowances, scholarships, compensation for harm to life or health, child support and other money given to a citizen as a means of subsistence are not returned, provided the recipient acted in good faith and there was no calculation error. Money or property transferred in performance of an obligation that does not exist is not returned if the recipient proves that the person who made the transfer knew about the absence of the obligation, or that the transfer was a charitable gift.

The last rule is common in disputes. A payer who knowingly paid a non-existent debt and later regrets it cannot reclaim the money. The recipient has to prove the knowledge; the payer cannot be presumed to have known.

Payments Without a Signed Contract

Many cross-border payments are made on the strength of an invoice and an email. If the services were not provided, the payer may claim the money back as unjust enrichment, while the recipient may reply that the work was done. Then the case turns on proof of delivery: acts, correspondence, tracking data and the testimony of those involved.

If the contract was concluded but is invalid, for example for a defect of form or authority, the Civil Code provides for the consequences of an invalid transaction, and the relation between that claim and a claim for enrichment is governed by Article 1103. The claimant should state the facts and the basis carefully in the statement of claim, although the court itself determines which legal rules apply to the facts proved.

A foreign payer who sent an advance to a Russian company for goods that were never shipped normally pleads two grounds at once: breach of contract if there is one and unjust enrichment as the alternative.

Limitation Period and Interest

A claim for unjust enrichment is subject to the general limitation period of three years under the Civil Code. The period starts when the claimant learned or should have learned that his right was violated and who the proper defendant is. For a mistaken transfer, that moment is usually the date on which the payer discovered the mistake, and the claimant must be able to prove this date through a bank notice or correspondence.

The statement of claim may ask for interest on the sum, which the Civil Code allows from the time the recipient learned or should have learned about the lack of a basis. The amount depends on the bank key rate during the period and is calculated by the court. The claimant should send a written demand to the recipient first, since the date of that demand fixes the moment of knowledge when no earlier evidence exists.

Defending Against an Enrichment Claim

A defendant who receives such a claim has several lines of defence. The first is to show a basis: a signed contract, an invoice that the payer accepted, a debt that the payment settled or a gift. The second is to show that the services were provided or the goods delivered, so the payment was not at the payer's expense without return. The third is to rely on Article 1109, for instance because the payer knew that no obligation existed or because the limitation period for the paid debt had already expired.

A fourth line is the limitation period itself. If more than three years have passed from the moment the claimant learned of the violation, the court dismisses the claim on the defendant's application. The application must be made before the judgment, and a defendant who says nothing loses the argument.

A defendant who accepts that the money must be returned usually reduces costs by returning it voluntarily and recording the return in writing, because interest and the claimant's legal costs then stop growing.

Evidence to Save Immediately

Keep the bank confirmation of the transfer with the full details of the sender and the recipient, the invoice or message on which the payment was based, all correspondence after the mistake was found, proof that the demand was delivered and any admission by the recipient. Ask the sending bank for a written statement about the transfer and, if the money was sent to the wrong account, for the information about a recall request.

Documents in a foreign language are translated by a translator whose signature a Russian notary certifies. Screenshots of online banking should be supplemented by a bank statement, since a court gives more weight to the bank's own paper.

Court Choice and Next Step

The claim goes to an arbitrazh court when both sides are companies or entrepreneurs and the dispute is economic, and otherwise to a court of general jurisdiction. The territorial rules depend on the defendant's location and on any valid jurisdiction clause. A foreign claimant may act through a Russian representative with a power of attorney.

The practical sequence is a written demand to return the money within a short stated period, a check of the recipient's registration data, a claim with the evidence above and, if there is a risk that assets will disappear, a request for interim measures with the claim.

The attorney analyses mistaken and unsupported payments, prepares demands and claims and represents claimants and defendants in these disputes. Review begins with the payment records and whatever documents surround the transfer.

The main channel of communication with the attorney is email: attorneypetrova1@gmail.com.