The Constitutional Court recognised that theft, extortion, fraud and other crimes against property might additionally subject a victim to mental anguish serious enough to serve as grounds for claiming compensation for moral harm. This was caused by a complaint filed by a Russian citizen who fell victim to fraud when arranging his mother’s funeral. The courts refused him compensation for moral harm, referring to the Civil Code; however, the Constitutional Court recognised such interpretation to be unconstitutional.

Alexander Yagelnitskiy, Counsel at Petrol Chilikov, Associate Professor at the Department of Private Law, Lomonosov Moscow State University, explains that, in the applicant’s instance, the violation of his personal non-property rights was evident. However, in the future, the courts are to clarify the criteria applicable in such matters. The extent, to which sufferings caused by a property-related offence do not exceed the limit of usual living difficulties, and the extent, to which a property-related offence is closely related to non-property benefits, such that it is sufficient to consider victim’s mental anguish, need to be settled.

Full article here (in Russian).