Commentary by Vladimir Isaenko on Pravo.ru
This week, the Economic Collegium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation will have to sort out the issue of who is responsible for the insurer's additional obligations to the client (case No. A40-3095/2024).
A transport company (the defendant) and a company entered into a transport forwarding agreement (delivery of tobacco from St. Petersburg to Novosibirsk). During unloading, a shortage and damage to the products were discovered.
The company applied to AO ALFASTRAKHOVANIE (the claimant) for an insurance payment. The event was recognized as an insured event. According to the agreement, the insurance value was calculated based on: documents for the goods; an additional 10% of the specified value. The insurer paid 21.5 million rubles, and then filed a claim against the transport company to recover this amount by way of subrogation.
Three courts sided with the insurance company. The transport company has a different position: the additional 10% are not losses of the company (within the meaning of Article 387 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, Article 965 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), but a voluntary obligation of the insurance company. The condition of the contract does not create obligations for the transport company, therefore, an additional 10% cannot be collected from it.
Infralex lawyer Vladimir Isaenko predicts that the Economic Collegium will limit the insurer's right, transferred to it by subrogation, to the amount of actual damage and will not recognize the right to compensation for the amount of the premium in excess of the damages.
"In this case, the Supreme Court will confirm the principle that subrogation cannot entail an unreasonable imposition on the defendant of compensation in excess of the amount of actual damage," Vladimir explained.