The article examines the socio-economic prerequisites for the formation and development of the institute of prevention of harm in Russian civil law and permanent prohibitory injunction as a similar institution in the law of foreign countries (USA, England, Germany). The current state of these legal phenomena, the practice of their application by courts is considered. It is concluded that it is necessary to receive some legal positions developed in foreign doctrine and law enforcement practice. The possibility of fixing in Russian civil law the payment of monetary compensation for future harm as a method of protection is substantiated. It is indicated that it is possible to take into account the nature of the area in which it is carried out in cases of banning activities.

prevention of harm, injunction, prohibition and suspension of activity, danger of harm

Senotrusova Evgenia Mikhailovna – Senior Lecturer of the Department of General Humanitarian and Socio-Economic Disciplines, Irkutsk Law Institute (branch) University of the Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation (1, Shevtsova st., Irkutsk, 664035, Russian Federation), ORCID: 0000-0001-8292-1193, RSCI AuthorID: 684924, e-mail: evg-suranova@yandex.ru

Senotrusova E. M. Zapret deyatel'nosti v rossijskom grazhdanskom prave (st. 1065 GK RF) i sudebnyj zapret v prave zarubezhnyh stran: sravnitel'no-pravovoj aspekt [Prohibition of activity in Russian Civil Law (article 1065 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation) and injunction in the law of foreign countries: comparative legal aspect] Sibirskij yuridicheskij vestnik [Siberian Law Herald]. 2023, no 3(102), pp. 37–44. – DOI 10.26516/2071-8136.2023.3.37.

340.5

1. Klimovich A.V. Obyazatelstva po preduprezhdeniyu prichineniya vreda v grazhdanskom prave Rossii [Obligations to prevent harm in the civil law of Russia]. Sibirskij yuridicheskij vestnik [Siberian Law Herald], 2016, no. 3 (74), pp. 75-80. (in Russian)

2. Neznamov A.V. Sudebnyj zapret kak sposob, sredstvo i forma zashchity prava [Injunction as a method, means and form of protection of the right]. Moscow, Yurlitinform Publ., 2015, 216 р. (in Russian)

3. Senotrusova E.M. Sudebnyj zapret i vozmeshchenie vreda: perspektivy sblizheniya mekhanizmov zashchity grazhdanskih prav [Injunction and compensation for harm: prospects for the convergence of civil rights protection mechanisms]. Permskij yuridicheskij almanah [Perm Legal Almanac], 2021, no. 4, pp. 473-485. (in Russian)

4. Bryan M. Injunctions and damages. Singapore Academy of Law Journal, 2016, pp. 921-954.

5. Chao B.H. After eBay, Inc. v. MercExchange: The Changing Landscape for Patent Remedies. Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology, 2008, vol. 9, pp. 543-572.

6. Claus O., Schafer H-B. The Dichotomy between Property Rules and Liability Rules: Experiences from German Law. Erasmus Law Review, 2008, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 41-58.

7. Gale Encyclopedia of American Law. Ed. by D. Batten. 3rd ed. Gale, 2010, vol. 5, р. 428-430.

8. Siebrasse N.V., Sikorski R., Contreras J.L., Cotter T.F., Golden J., Jong S.J., Love B.J., Taylor D.O. Injunctive Relief. Patent Remedies and Complex Products. Ed. by C. Bradford Biddle, 2019, June, pp. 115-159. DOI: 10.1017/9781108594981.005

9. Klass A.B. Pesticides, Children’s Health Policy, and Common Law. Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology, 2005, vol. 7, pp. 89-146.

10. McBride N.J., Bagshaw R. Tort Law. Pearson Education Limited, 2018, 949 p.

11. Palmer R., Pontin B. Injunctions through the lens of nuisance. Research handbooks in private and commercial law. Ed. by R. Halson, D. Campbell. UK, Northampton, MA, USA, Edward Elgar Publ., 2019, pp. 294-310.