Skip to content
Yalanzhi & PartnersCriminal defence in Russia

Case results

Fraud reclassified and sentence reduced — Article 159, cassation

Article 159 of the Criminal Code (fraud)CassationReclassified

Before

Immediate custodial sentence

After

Conduct reclassified, sentence reduced

How

Established that the conduct had been classified wrongly.

The situation

A custodial sentence for fraud. On cassation the defence established that the conduct had been placed under the wrong classification.

The result

The cassation court accepted the argument on classification and reduced the sentence accordingly.

In detail

Analysis

Why classification is the point of attack in fraud cases

Article 159 is drafted broadly, and the parts of it are separated by the size of the loss and by aggravating features. The thresholds are absolute figures: significant damage, large scale, especially large scale. Because they are absolute, the calculation of the loss decides the part, and the part decides the sentence.

The other recurring question is intent. Fraud requires that the accused intended not to perform from the moment of the transaction. Non-performance that arose later is a breach of contract, and a contractual dispute is not a criminal offence. The Supreme Court addressed this directly in Plenum Resolution No. 48 of 30 November 2017.

Why cassation could reach it

Classification is a question of law, and questions of law are exactly what survives to cassation. A complaint asking the cassation court to take a different view of the evidence would have been refused; a complaint showing that the established facts do not fit the article as charged is within its powers.

Published in summary form with identifying details removed. A result obtained in one case is not a prediction for another: outcomes depend on the evidence, the classification and the procedural history of the specific case.

See also

Other case results