Comparative legal analysis of consumer protection in the field of trade in the post-Soviet countries

Topilin Igor' Vitalevich Postgraduate Student, Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under The Government of the Russian Federation 117218, Russia, Moscow, B. Cheremushkinskaya str., 34 igor.topilin@rambler.ru Other publications by this author

The regulation of consumer protection in the post-Soviet countries as a whole has common features, but there are a number of specific features. When studying the experience of the post-Soviet countries on the issue of regulating consumer protection, it should be borne in mind that the source of the law of these relations can be both a codified regulatory legal act and a special law.

The legal regulation of the countries of the post-Soviet space notes the special subject composition of the retail purchase and sale agreement, where on one side is a person engaged in commercial activities, and on the other side is an individual entering into a relationship to meet their personal household needs. In the Republic of Belarus (article 1 of the Law of the Republic of Belarus dated January 9, 2002 No. 90-Z "On protection of consumer rights" next Zozpp of the Republic of Belarus), the Republic of Kazakhstan (article 1 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated may 4, 2010 № 274-IV "On protection of consumer rights" next Zozpp Republic Kazastan), Ukraine (article 1 of the Law of Ukraine from 12 may 1991 № 1023-XII "On protection of consumer rights" – dalle Zozpp of Ukraine), The Kyrgyz Republic (article 1-1 of the Law of the Kyrgyz Republic of December 10, 1997, № 90 "On protection of consumer rights" next Zozpp Kyrgyz Republic), the Republic of Moldova (article 1 of the Law of the Republic of Moldova of March 13, 2003 No. 105-XV "On protection of consumer rights" next Zozpp of the Republic of Moldova), the Republic of Azerbaijan (article 1 of the Law of the Azerbaijan Republic of September 19, 1995, No. 1113 "On protection of consumer rights" next Zozpp of the Azerbaijan Republic), The Republic of Tajikistan (article 1 of the Law of the Republic of Tajikistan of December 9, 2004 No. 72 "On protection of consumer rights" next Zozpp of the Republic of Tajikistan), Turkmenistan (article 1 of the Law of Turkmenistan on November 8, 2014 No. 140-V "On protection of consumer rights" – Zozpp Turkmenistan), the Republic of Uzbekistan (article 1 of the Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan of April 26, 1996 No. 221-I "On protection of consumer rights" – Zozpp of the Republic of Uzbekistan), The Republic of Armenia (article 1 of the Law of the Republic of Armenia dated 20 July 2001, No. SP-197 "On protection of consumer rights" next Zozpp of the Republic of Armenia), the Republic of Latvia (article 1 of the Law of the Republic of Latvia dated March 18, 1999 # "On protection of consumer rights" next Zozpp of the Republic of Latvia), the Republic of Estonia (article 2 of the Law of the Republic of Estonia on 09 December 2015 "On protection of consumer rights" next Zozpp of the Republic of Estonia), the parties of the contract of retail purchase and sale referred to as the buyer and the seller. The special name of the parties is noted in Georgia, where the participants in these relations are referred to as a consumer and a merchant (Article 4 of the Law of Georgia dated March 29, 2022 No. 1455-viii-x "On Consumer Rights Protection" – hereinafter the ZoZPP of Georgia), and in the Republic of Lithuania, where the parties are a seller-entrepreneur and a buyer-consumer (Article 6.350 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania – hereinafter the Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania). In the Russian Federation, the parties to the retail sale contract are the seller and the consumer (preamble to the Law of the Russian Federation dated 07.02.1992 No. 2300-1 "On Consumer Rights Protection" - hereinafter the RF ZoZPP). Despite a number of differences in the names of the parties to the retail sale agreement, the specific features inherent in the subject matter of this agreement are the same and are reflected in the legislation.

The legislation of the post-Soviet countries also remained uniform on the issue of indicating the public nature of legal relations between the consumer and the seller. Thus, in the Russian Federation (paragraph 2 of Article 492 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation – hereinafter the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), the Republic of Belarus (Article 464 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Belarus – hereinafter the Civil Code of the Republic of Belarus), the Republic of Kazakhstan (Article 447 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan – hereinafter the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan), Ukraine (Article 699 of the Civil Code of Ukraine – hereinafter referred to as the Civil Code of Ukraine), the Kyrgyz Republic (Article 457 of the Civil Code of the Kyrgyz Republic – hereinafter referred to as the Civil Code of the Kyrgyz Republic), the Republic of Moldova (Part 1 of Article 1161 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Moldova – hereinafter referred to as the Civil Code of the Republic of Moldova), the Republic of Azerbaijan (Article 616.1 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan – hereinafter referred to as the Civil Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan), the Republic of Tajikistan (Part 1 Article 529 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Tajikistan – hereinafter the Civil Code of the Republic of Tajikistan), Turkmenistan (Part 2 of Article 343 of the Civil Code of Turkmenistan – hereinafter the Civil Code of Turkmenistan), the Republic of Uzbekistan (Article 426 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan – hereinafter the Civil Code of Uzbekistan), the Republic of Armenia (Article 510 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Armenia – hereinafter the Civil Code of the Republic of Armenia), the Lithuanian The Republic (Article 6.352 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania) explicitly establishes that the retail sale contract is a public contract and is concluded using a public offer. Meanwhile, the legislation of Georgia, the Republic of Latvia, and the Republic of Estonia does not specify that the contract is public. However, checking the legislative regulation for compliance with the set of features inherent in a public contract shows that in these countries the retail sale contract is public ^[1].

A special subject, as a specific feature of the retail sale contract, is reflected in the legislation of the post-Soviet countries. The subject of a retail sale contract as a product intended for personal, family, home or other use not related to the implementation of entrepreneurial activity is in the legislation of the Russian Federation (paragraph 1 of Article 492 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), the Republic of Belarus (paragraph 1 of Article 462 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Belarus), the Republic of Kazakhstan (Article 445 of the Civil Code Of the Republic of Kazakhstan), Ukraine (Part 1 of Article 698 of the Civil Code of Ukraine), the Kyrgyz Republic (paragraph 1 of Article 455 of the Civil Code of the Kyrgyz Republic), the Republic of Azerbaijan (Article 614.1 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan), the Republic of Tajikistan (Part 1 of Article 528 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Tajikistan), Turkmenistan (Article 1 of the ZoZPP of Turkmenistan), the Republic of Uzbekistan (Article 425 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan), the Republic of Armenia (Article 508 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Armenia), Georgia (paragraph 1 of Article 16 of the ZoZPP of Georgia), the Republic of Lithuania (Article 6.350 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania), the Republic of Estonia (paragraph 4 of Article 208 of the Law of Obligations of the Republic of Estonia dated September 26, 2001 of the Republic of Estonia). The same subject matter of the contract according to its features in the legislation of the Republic of Moldova and the Republic of Latvia, but it is called differently. In the legislation of the Republic of Moldova, it is called differently: a movable material thing (Part 1 of Article 1156 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Moldova), a commodity (Article 1 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Moldova). In the Republic of Latvia, the subject of a retail sale agreement is a product (Article 1 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Latvia).

The legal nature of the retail sale agreement allows us to assert several of its forms. A common purchase of goods over the counter is an example of an oral form of the contract, where the time of its conclusion and execution coincide. The separation of oral and written forms of the contract is found in the Russian Federation (Article 493 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), the Republic of Belarus (Article 463 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Belarus), the Republic of Kazakhstan (Article 446 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan), Ukraine (paragraph 7 of Article 1 of the ZoZPP of Ukraine), the Kyrgyz Republic (Article 456 of the Civil Code of the Kyrgyz Republic), the Republic of Moldova (Part 1 of Article 1162 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Moldova), the Republic of Azerbaijan (Article 615 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan), the Republic of Tajikistan (Article 8 (1) of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Tajikistan), Turkmenistan (Article 17 of the ZoZPP of Turkmenistan), the Republic of Uzbekistan (Article 10 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Uzbekistan), the Republic of Armenia (Article 509 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Armenia), The Republic of Lithuania (Article 6.351 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania).

The legislation of Georgia, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Estonia does not specify the form of the contract. The electronic form of the retail sale contract is not singled out as a separate form of contract in the legislation of the post-Soviet countries. The traditional position is that an agreement concluded with the help of electronic or other technical means that make it possible to reproduce its contents unchanged on a tangible medium, as well as signed by the parties, as a result of the exchange of electronic documents, refers to the written form of transactions. H.V. Idrisov believes that equating the written and electronic form of transactions is not entirely correct the approach and proposes to legislate the electronic form of the transaction ^[2]. T.Y. Kulik, despite the identification of signs of an agreement concluded in electronic form, believes that it should be equated with a contract concluded in simple written form ^[3].

The electronic form of concluding a retail purchase and sale agreement should not be confused with a remote method of selling goods, which implies concluding a contract based on the buyer's familiarization with the description of the goods offered by the seller through catalogs, brochures, booklets, photographs, means of communication (television, postal, radio, etc.) or other methods that exclude the possibility of direct acquaintance of the consumer with the goods or a sample of the goods at the conclusion of such a contract. This method of selling goods is provided not only for electronic form, it can also be concluded in simple written form directly at the seller's location, but in the physical absence of the goods themselves. This method of selling goods is legally fixed in the Russian Federation (Article 26.1 of the RF ZoZPP), the Kyrgyz Republic (Article 24-1 of the ZoZPP of the Kyrgyz Republic), Turkmenistan (Article 24 of the ZoZPP of Turkmenistan), the Republic of Uzbekistan (Article 28.1 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Uzbekistan), Georgia (Chapter 3 of the ZoZPP of Georgia), the Republic of Latvia (Article 10 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Latvia).

The civil law regulation of relations arising at the conclusion of a retail sale agreement in the post-Soviet countries is the same on the issue of the seller's pre-contractual obligation to provide the buyer with information about the goods. The seller's obligation to provide the buyer with the necessary and reliable information about the product is established in the legislation of the Russian Federation (Article 495 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), the Republic of Belarus (Article 465 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Belarus), the Republic of Kazakhstan (Article 448 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan), Ukraine (Article 700 of the Civil Code of Ukraine), the Kyrgyz Republic (Article 458 of the Civil Code of the Kyrgyz Republic), The Republic of Moldova (Article 25 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Moldova), the Republic of Azerbaijan (Article 617 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan), the Republic of Tajikistan (Part 1 of Article 530 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Tajikistan), Turkmenistan (Article 14 of the ZoZPP of Turkmenistan), the Republic of Uzbekistan (Article 427 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan), the Republic of Armenia (Article 511 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Armenia), Georgia (Article 5 of the ZoZPP of Georgia), the Republic of Lithuania (Article 6.353 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania), the Republic of Latvia (Article 17 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Latvia), the Republic of Estonia (Article 14.1 of the Law of Obligations of the Republic of Estonia). Thus, in all countries of the post-Soviet space, the pre-contractual obligation of the seller to provide the necessary and reliable information about the product is fixed. The legislative consolidation of this obligation is primarily due to the need to protect the weak side from the information point of view. The consumer cannot presume the availability of knowledge in all fields of science and technology involved in the production of goods, and therefore the consolidation of this obligation seems justified.

The general features in the legal regulation of the contract of retail sale should also include essential conditions. The essential terms of the retail sale agreement in the legislations of the post-Soviet countries are the subject and price (Article 500 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, Article 470 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Belarus, paragraph 1 of Article 453 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Part 1 of Article 706 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, paragraph 1 of Article 464 of the Civil Code of the Kyrgyz Republic, Article 1163 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Moldova, Article 622.1 of the Civil Code Of the Republic of Azerbaijan, Part 1 of Article 535 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Tajikistan, Part 2 of Article 501 of the Civil Code of Turkmenistan, Article 432 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Article 516 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Armenia, Article 6 of the Civil Code of Georgia, paragraph 2 of Article 6.353 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania, paragraph 1 of Article 17 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Latvia, Article 28.1 of the Law of Obligations of the Republic of Estonia).

The possibility for the buyer to exchange non-food goods of proper quality at his own will is unique for a purchase and sale agreement and is provided only for such a type as a retail sale agreement. The exchange of non-food goods of proper quality actually allows the consumer to return the non-food goods and refuse the transaction within the period prescribed by law, since if the consumer does not choose a suitable product for himself, he can refuse the exchange and demand a refund. As a rule, this period in the legislation of the post-Soviet countries is similar to that established in the Russian Federation (paragraph 1 of Article 502 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), and is fourteen days, not counting the day of purchase (paragraph 1 of Article 472 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Belarus, paragraph 1 of Article 454 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, part 1 of Article 707 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, paragraph 1 of Article 465 of the Civil Code of the Kyrgyz Republic, Part 1 of Article 1164 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Moldova, Article 623.1 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan, Part 1 of Article 536 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Tajikistan, Article 517 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Armenia, Article 6.362 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania). In Turkmenistan, this period is fifteen days (paragraph 1, part 2 of Article 20 of the ZoZPP of Turkmenistan), and in the Republic of Uzbekistan – ten days (Article 433 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan – 10 days). Thus, in these countries of the post-Soviet space, the difference concerns only the period of exchange of non-food goods of proper quality.

In Georgia (clause 1 of Article 13 of the ZoZPP of Georgia) and the Republic of Latvia (Article 12 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Latvia), the possibility of exchanging non-food goods of proper quality is presented only when concluding a contract remotely. In the Republic of Estonia, within 14 days after the conclusion of the contract, the consumer has the right to withdraw from the traveling sales contract (a contract that is concluded outside the location of the entrepreneur or by means of communication) without explaining the reasons (Article 49 of the Law of Obligations of the Republic of Estonia). Thus, in these post-Soviet countries, the possibility of exchanging non-food goods of proper quality is limited. It seems that this restriction is established in order to recognize the equality of participants in regulated relations, where the right to terminate the contract is unilaterally represented by one of the parties in an exceptional case.

In Turkmenistan, the possibility of exchanging goods of proper quality is also provided for non-perishable food products within thirty-six hours from the moment of its sale (paragraph 2, part 2, Article 20 of the ZoZPP of Turkmenistan). It seems that providing this opportunity to the consumer is unnecessary, since it generates unreasonable consumption, and also damages the stability of economic relations.

The right to unilateral termination of the retail sale contract in case of purchase of goods of inadequate quality is not represented in all countries of the post-Soviet space and also has its own characteristics. This right is granted to the consumer in the Russian Federation (paragraph 1 of Article 18 of the RF CcZPP), the Republic of Belarus (paragraph 3 of Article 20 of the CcZPP of the Republic of Belarus), Kazakhstan (paragraph 1 of Article 15 of the CcZPP of the Republic of Kazakhstan), the Kyrgyz Republic (paragraph 3 of Article 466 of the Civil Code of the Kyrgyz Republic), the Republic of Azerbaijan (Article 624.4 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan), the Republic of Tajikistan (Part 3 of Article 537 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Tajikistan), the Republic of Uzbekistan (Article 13 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Uzbekistan), the Republic of Armenia (paragraph 3 of Article 518 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Armenia), the Republic of Lithuania (Article 6.364.1 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania). However, this right is limited in relation to technically complex goods, where a significant drawback is required to terminate the contract unilaterally (clause 1 of Article 18 of the RF ZoZPP, clause 7 of Article 20 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Belarus, clause 1-1 of Article 15 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Kazakhstan, clause 1 of Article 17 of the ZoZPP of the Kyrgyz Republic, Article 18 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Tajikistan, clause 1 Article 518 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Armenia). In the Republic of Azerbaijan, the right to unilaterally terminate the contract by the consumer with respect to technically complex goods is not limited.

The right to unilateral termination of the retail sale contract in case of purchase of goods of inadequate quality in the presence of a significant defect within the warranty period is presented in Ukraine (Part 1 of Article 8 of the ZoZPP of Ukraine), in the Republic of Moldova after the exercise of other rights (part 16 of Article 18 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Moldova), in the Republic of Latvia (paragraph 6 of Article 28 ZoZPP of the Republic of Latvia). In Turkmenistan (Part 13 of Article 22 and part 1 of Article 23 of the ZoZPP of Turkmenistan) and in Georgia (paragraph 5 of Article 17 of the ZoZPP of Georgia) in case of violation of the deadline for eliminating a shortage of goods or a significant defect. In the Republic of Estonia, if there is a significant defect or the seller refuses to carry out repairs (Article 223 of the Law of Obligations of the Republic of Estonia).

Thus, three approaches have been formed on the issue of termination by the consumer of the retail purchase and sale agreement unilaterally in the case of the purchase of goods of inadequate quality in the post-Soviet space:

1. granting the right to unilaterally terminate the retail sale contract by the consumer in case of purchase of goods of inadequate quality with restrictions provided for technically complex goods (Republic of Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Republic of Tajikistan, Republic of Uzbekistan, Republic of Armenia, Republic of Lithuania);

2. granting the right to unilaterally terminate the retail sale contract by the consumer in case of purchase of goods of inadequate quality with a significant disadvantage (Ukraine, Republic of Moldova, Republic of Latvia, Turkmenistan, Georgia, Republic of Estonia);

3. granting the right to unilaterally terminate the retail purchase and sale agreement by the consumer in case of purchase of goods of inadequate quality without any restrictions (Azerbaijan Republic).

The legislation in the post-Soviet space provides additional guarantees to the consumer and in respect of penalties. For example, for late fulfillment of consumer requirements, a penalty of one percent of the price of goods is provided in the Russian Federation (paragraph 1 of Article 23 of the RF ZoZPP), the Republic of Belarus (paragraph 1 of Article 26 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Belarus), the Republic of Kazakhstan (paragraph 6 of Article 30 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Kazakhstan), Ukraine (part 9 of Article 12 of the ZoZPP of Ukraine), the Kyrgyz Republic (paragraph 1 of Article 22 of the ZoZPP of the Kyrgyz Republic), the Republic of Moldova (part 1 of Article 32 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Moldova), the Republic of Azerbaijan (paragraph 6 of Article 7 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Azerbaijan), the Republic of Tajikistan (Article 23 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Tajikistan), Turkmenistan (Part 13 of Article 22 of the ZoZPP of Turkmenistan), the Republic of Uzbekistan (Article 14 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Uzbekistan), the Republic of Armenia (paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Armenia). However, not all countries of the post-Soviet space have legislation following this path. In Georgia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Estonia, there is no legal penalty in the legislation on consumer protection. Thus, the parties independently determine the amount of the penalty and the cases of its recovery.

The uniqueness of the regulation of the seller's civil liability to the consumer also lies in the mandatory compensation for moral damage without the need to prove any suffering. Mandatory compensation for moral damage in case of violation of consumer rights is awarded by a court in the Russian Federation (Article 15 of the RF ZoZPP), the Republic of Belarus (Article 18 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Belarus), the Republic of Kazakhstan (Article 21 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Kazakhstan), Ukraine (Part 2 of Article 22 of the ZoZPP of Ukraine), the Kyrgyz Republic (Article 14 of the ZoZPP of the Kyrgyz Republic), the Republic of Moldova (Part 4 of Article 20 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Moldova), the Republic of Azerbaijan (Article 12 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Azerbaijan), the Republic of Tajikistan (Article 15 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Tajikistan), the Republic of Uzbekistan (Article 22 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Uzbekistan). In Turkmenistan, the Republic of Armenia, Georgia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Estonia, there is no mandatory compensation for moral damage to the consumer in case of recognition of violation of his rights by the court.

The period of satisfaction of consumer requirements in the post-Soviet countries may also be limited at the legislative level. The difference lies in the length of this period. In the Russian Federation and the Republic of Kazakhstan, this period is ten days (Article 15 of the RF ZoZPP and paragraph 2 of Article 42-4 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Kazakhstan). In the Republic of Belarus (paragraph 1 of Article 25 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Belarus) and the Republic of Tajikistan (Article 22 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Tajikistan), this period is seven days. In the Republic of Moldova (Part 20 of Article 18 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Moldova) and the Republic of Lithuania (Part 2 of Article 21 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Lithuania) – fourteen days, and in the Republic of Latvia – fifteen working days (Article 17 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Latvia).

Differentiated terms are provided in Ukraine (Part 6 of Article 8 of the ZoZPP of Ukraine), in the Kyrgyz Republic (ZoZPP of the Kyrgyz Republic), the Republic of Azerbaijan (ZoZPP of the Republic of Azerbaijan), Turkmenistan (ZoZPP of Turkmenistan), the Republic of Uzbekistan (ZoZPP of the Republic of Uzbekistan), the Republic of Armenia (ZoZPP of the Republic of Armenia).

Georgia (clause 1 of Article 17 of the Georgian ZoZPP) and the Republic of Estonia (clause 4.2 of Article 222 of the Law of Obligations of the Republic of Estonia) have established a reasonable time limit for satisfying consumer requirements. Thus, in all countries of the post-Soviet space, deadlines for meeting consumer requirements have been established. It seems that the establishment of a reasonable time to meet the requirements of the consumer is not appropriate. The category "reasonable time" is of an evaluative nature and has no practical meaning in the legal relations under consideration, since it does not limit the validity of the seller in any way.

In addition to civil law guarantees in the field of consumer protection, the legislation also provides for civil procedural guarantees. In the Russian Federation (Clause 3 of Article 17 of the RF ZoZPP), the Republic of Belarus (clause 1.1.9 of clause 1 of Article 285 of the Tax Code of the Republic of Belarus (Special Part) No. 71-Z dated December 29, 2009), the Republic of Kazakhstan (Part 3 of Article 106 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated October 31, 2015 No. 377-V), Ukraine (Part 3 of Article 22 of the ZoZPP of Ukraine), the Kyrgyz Republic (paragraph 4 of Article 16 of the ZoZPP of the Kyrgyz Republic), the Republic of Moldova (Part 2 of Article 31 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Moldova), the Republic of Azerbaijan (Article 26 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Azerbaijan), Turkmenistan (part 2 of Article 27 of the ZoZPP of Turkmenistan), the Republic of Uzbekistan (Article 29 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Uzbekistan) the consumer is exempt from paying the state duty on claims for consumer protection.

Are not exempt from payment of state duty on consumer protection claims in the Republic of Tajikistan (Article 5 of the Law of the Republic of Tajikistan dated February 28, 2004 No. 19 "On State Duty"), the Republic of Armenia (Article 22 of the Law of the Republic of Armenia dated January 10, 1998 No. ZR-186 "On State Duty"), Georgia (Article 4 of the Law of Georgia of April 29, 1998 No. 1363 "On State Duty"), the Republic of Lithuania (Article 83 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Lithuania of February 28, 2002 No. IX-743), the Republic of Latvia (Article 26 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Latvia of October 14, 1998), the Republic of Estonia (art. 145 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Estonia dated April 20, 2005). Thus, states in the post-Soviet space decide differently on the issue of exemption from payment of state duty on consumer protection claims.

The next civil procedure guarantee is the availability of alternative jurisdiction for consumers in most countries of the post-Soviet space. A claim for consumer protection is filed at the plaintiff's place of residence or at the place of performance of the contract or at the place of injury in the Republic of Belarus (Article 47 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Belarus No. 238-Z of January 11, 1999), in Ukraine (Part 5 of Article 28 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine of March 18, 2004 No. 1618-IV), in the Republic of Tajikistan (Article 17 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Tajikistan and part 7 of Article 31 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Tajikistan dated January 5, 2008).

A statement of claim for consumer protection is filed at the plaintiff's place of residence or at the place of conclusion or execution of the contract of the Russian Federation (clause 2 of Article 17 of the RF ZoZPP), in the Republic of Kazakhstan (Part 9 of Article 30 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated October 31, 2015 No. 377-V), in the Kyrgyz Republic (Part 7 of Article 31 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Kyrgyz Republic dated January 25, 2017 No. 14), in the Republic of Moldova (Part 10 of Article 39 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Moldova dated May 30, 2003 No. 225-XV), in the Republic of Azerbaijan (Article 36.9 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan dated December 28, 1999 No. 780-IQ).

A statement of claim for consumer rights protection is filed at the plaintiff's place of residence or at the place of harm in Turkmenistan (part 1 of Article 27 of the ZoZPP of Turkmenistan), in the Republic of Uzbekistan (Article 29 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Uzbekistan).

In the Republic of Lithuania (paragraph 11 of Article 30 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Lithuania No. IX-743 of February 28, 2002) and the Republic of Estonia (Article 90 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Estonia of April 20, 2005), a claim for consumer protection may be filed at the plaintiff's place of residence.

In the Republic of Armenia (Article 21 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Armenia No. ZR-110 dated February 27, 2018) and in the Republic of Latvia (Article 26 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Latvia dated October 14, 1998), a claim for consumer protection is filed according to the general rules.

An additional civil liability for the seller in the legislation of the Russian Federation is the fine established in paragraph 6 of Article 13 of the ZoZPP in the Russian Federation in the amount of fifty percent of the amount awarded by the court in favor of the consumer. This fine is awarded by the court in favor of the plaintiff, which is a unique legislative decision in the post-Soviet space. In the Republic of Belarus (paragraph 2 of Article 44 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Belarus), a fine of one hundred percent of the amount awarded in favor of the consumer is credited to the local budget, and in the Kyrgyz Republic (paragraph 5 of Article 16 of the ZoZPP of the Kyrgyz Republic) and the Republic of Tajikistan (Article 13 of the Law on Consumer Protection of the Republic of Tajikistan) – to the republican budget.

In Ukraine, according to Part 1 and Part 2 of Article 23 of the ZoZPP of Ukraine, the fine for violation of legislation on consumer protection is differentiated and credited to the state budget.

In Kazakhstan, the Republic of Moldova, Turkmenistan, the Republic of Uzbekistan, the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Estonia, there is no penalty at all based on the results of consideration of a consumer dispute by a court.

The National Competition Agency of Georgia operates in Georgia, which, according to paragraph 2 of Article 33 of the ZoZPP of Georgia, when confirming a violation of the rights of a consumer group, has the right to demand from the merchant the restoration of the violated right or the termination of the prohibited action. In case of non-fulfillment or improper fulfillment, a fine may be imposed on the merchant, the amount of which should not exceed 2 percent of the annual turnover of the previous financial year. However, this fine is credited to the State budget and is essentially an administrative responsibility.

Part of the post-Soviet countries retained criminal liability for measuring, weighing, counting, dissemination of deliberately false information or the use of advertising misleading consumers about the quality, quantity, composition, method of manufacture and other characteristics of products (Article 250 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Belarus of July 9, 1999 No. 275- Z, Article 200.1 of the Criminal Code Of the Republic of Azerbaijan dated December 30, 1999 No. 787-IQ, part 1 of Article 294 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Tajikistan dated May 21, 1998 No. 574, article 264 of the Criminal Code of Turkmenistan dated June 12, 1997 No. 222-I).

At the moment, there is no legally established procedure for pre-trial settlement of a consumer dispute in the Russian Federation. In the event of a dispute, the consumer, at his own choice, decides to appeal a claim to the seller in a pre-trial procedure. However, a number of post-Soviet countries have provided for a pre-trial dispute settlement procedure.

In the Republic of Kazakhstan, there are subjects of pre-trial dispute settlement, to which, according to paragraph 1 of Article 42-2 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the consumer can apply in case of violation of his rights and legitimate interests. The list of subjects of pre-trial settlement of consumer disputes is approved by the order of the First Vice-Minister of Trade and Integration of the Republic of Kazakhstan and contains the name of organizations, as well as their address and contact phone number (The list of subjects of pre-trial settlement of consumer disputes, approved by the order of the First Vice-Minister of Trade and Integration of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated June 30, 2022 No. 276-NK). According to paragraph 1 of Article 42-8 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Kazakhstan, pre-trial consideration of a dispute between a consumer and a seller is carried out on a voluntary basis.

There is also a Unified Information System for Consumer Protection in the Republic of Kazakhstan, which, according to Article 6-3 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Kazakhstan, is an information system designed to automate the process of receiving and reviewing consumer appeals, systematizing them and accounting at all levels of the consumer protection system. Through this system, the consumer can contact the seller with a claim for the elimination of violations of his rights and interests.

The Republic of Lithuania has an information system of consumer rights, which is a state information system through which consumers can submit appeals and complaints in electronic form to state and municipal institutions (Article 12.1 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Lithuania).

The Russian Federation also provides for the possibility of sending an appeal on the violation of consumer rights through the official website of the Federal Service for Supervision of Consumer Rights Protection and Human Well-Being with the possibility of authorization through a Unified Identification and Authentication System.

In the Republic of Lithuania, there is a possibility of pre-trial consideration of a dispute between a seller and a consumer (Article 22 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Lithuania). There are a number of institutions that consider disputes depending on its subject. For example, the Bar Council of the Lithuanian Bar Association considers disputes between lawyers and consumers on the provision of legal services. However, there are time limits: no later than one year after contacting the seller.

According to paragraph 1 of Article 28 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Lithuania, the decision of the body considering consumer disputes enters into force and is binding if none of the parties to the dispute within 30 days from the date of the decision of the body considering consumer disputes on the merits of the dispute does not file a claim with the court of general jurisdiction in accordance with the procedure established by the Civil Procedure Code, with a motion to consider the dispute on the merits. The decision of the institution for the consideration of consumer disputes that has entered into legal force is an executive document. 

In the Republic of Latvia, the Consumer Dispute Resolution Commission considers disputes between sellers and consumers in a pre-trial procedure (Chapter VI of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Latvia). According to clause 5 of Article 26.12 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Latvia, the Commission's decision is advisory in nature and cannot be challenged or appealed.

The Republic of Estonia provides for the possibility of pre-trial consideration of a dispute, but the result of out-of-court dispute resolution proceedings cannot be a decision that is legally binding for the consumer (paragraph 1 of Article 36 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Estonia). If the seller refuses to comply with the decision of the Commission on Consumer Disputes, then, according to paragraph 4 of Article 60 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Estonia, he is included in the list, which is published on the website of the Department of Consumer Protection and Technical Supervision.

According to paragraph 1 of Article 39 of the ZoZPP of the Republic of Estonia, the resolution of disputes related to contractual obligations arising from contracts for the sale of goods, the provision of services or the performance of other actions via the Internet can be carried out through the Internet dispute resolution platform.

The analysis of the legislation of the post-Soviet countries shows that the deviation from the principle of equality of participants in relations and freedom of contract on the issue of concluding a retail sale contract was carried out in favor of the consumer by establishing additional guarantees. The degree of deviation from the principle of equality of participants in relations and freedom of contract on the issue of concluding a retail sale contract in favor of the consumer in the post-Soviet countries differs.

The legislation of the Russian Federation, to a greater extent than in other post-Soviet countries, establishes guarantees for consumers: the pre-contractual obligation of the seller to provide the necessary and reliable information about the product, the right to exchange non-food goods of proper quality, the right to unilateral termination of the retail sale contract in the event of the purchase of goods of inadequate quality, the right to a legal penalty, the right to compulsory compensation for moral damage, the establishment of a limited period for satisfying the consumer's requirements by the seller, exemption from payment of state duty and alternative jurisdiction over consumer protection claims, a fine for non-fulfillment of the consumer's requirements on a voluntary basis.