E.D. Gilmutdinov,
Assistant of the Department of Economic Law of the Institute of Economics,
Management and Social Technologies of the Kazan National Research
Technical University named after A.N. Tupolev

This article contains a commentary on the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation from November 17, 2015 of No. 50 «About Application by Courts of the Legislation by Consideration of Some Questions Arising during Executive Production». The author, in particular, notes that the Resolution of the Plenum established criteria for the recognition of inactivity of a court bailiff as illegal. Thus, the omission of a bailiff may be declared illegal after a two-month period established by Art. 36 of the Law on enforcement proceedings, if he was able to make the necessary executive action and apply appropriate enforcement measures aimed at the full, proper and timely execution of requirements of the executive document within the statutory period, but did not do it, violating rights and legitimate interests of the party of executive production. When initial discussing of the draft, the Resolution contains a provision prohibiting to collect fees from each of debtors in solidarity fulfillment of obligations (para. 77 of the draft decree). However, representatives of the Federal Bailiff Service and the Office of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation took exception to this approach. According to these state agencies, the enforcement fee must be personified because it is an inherently penalties rather than a compensation measure.

Keywords: comments of judicial practice; enforcement; resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.