UDK 346.2 Субъекты хозяйственного права
The relevance of the study of judicial practice to protect the business reputation of citizens engaged in entrepreneurial activities and legal entities is due to the increasing number of open information sources, where expert and philistine points of view are presented. Despite the level of expertise, an opinion based on false information, as well as an opinion containing defamatory information, can cause a serious reputation for an entrepreneur. Today, in the age of rapid scaling of economic relations, business reputation plays an essential role in the success of any business, which is why an entrepreneur needs special attention to any opinion regarding his activities, product and service. The main practical materials that made it possible to formulate conclusions on this study were the materials of judicial practice for establishing variants of defamatory information, as well as for analyzing the sequence of court actions in the framework of the study of evidence in cases of protection of business reputation. It is established that the linguistic expertise in the framework of the consideration of cases to protect the business reputation of citizens and legal entities is a necessary condition for a full and comprehensive analysis of the circumstances. Special attention should be paid to the expert and subsequently to the court to various options for masking the value judgment of the afrmative form under their own opinion.
business reputation, defamatory information, false information, judicial protection, linguistic expertise, value judgment, opinion
1. On approval of the Accounting Regulation "Accounting for intangible assets" (PBU 14/2007): order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated December 27, 2007 No. 153n (as amended on May 16, 2016) (registered in the Ministry of Justice of Russia on January 23, 2008 No. 10975) // Access from the reference and legal system "ConsultantPlus".
2. Nadtachaev P. V., Melnik S. V., Galimov R. R. Problems of defining the concepts of "honor", "dignity" and "business reputation" as objects of protection of non-property rights of police officers // Law and state: theory and practice. 2019. No. 11 (179). P. 195-199.
3. Nadtachaev P. V. Business reputation as an object of legal protection // Eurasian Law Journal. 2018. No. 8 (123). P. 158-169.
4. Review of judicial practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 1, approved. by the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on February 16, 2017 // Information and legal portal "Garant.ru". URL: https://www.garant.ru/news/1096601/ (date of access: 05.11.2021).
5. On judicial practice in cases of protecting the honor and dignity of citizens, as well as the business reputation of citizens and legal entities: Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of February 24, 2005 No. 3 // Collection of decisions of the highest courts of the Russian Federation on civil cases / compiled by M. V. Skopinova. 4th ed., revised. and add. M.: Prospect, 2021.
6. Ivankov N. Evaluation opinion as a means of causing harm to business reputation // Electronic journal "Zakon.ru". URL: https://zakon.ru/blog/2019/05/17/ocenochnoe_mnenie_v_roli_sredstva_prichineniya_vreda_delovoj_reputacii (date of access: 03.02.2022).
7. Decision of the Arbitration Court of the Novosibirsk Region dated October 18, 2019 in case No. A45-31265/2018 // SudAkt. URL: https://sudact.ru/arbitral/doc/EOWBLpQ1ds6j/?arbitral-txt (date of access: 01.02.2022).
8. Resolution of the Seventeenth Arbitration Court of Appeal dated December 24, 2018 in case No. A60-67755/2017 // SudAkt. URL: https://sudact.ru/arbitral/doc/tGQw96jNU1Zg/?page=2&arbitraljudge=&arbitral (date of access: 11.02.2022).
9. Decision of the Arbitration Court of Samara Region dated September 15, 2016 in case No. A55-11862/2016 // SudAkt. URL: https://sudact.ru/arbitral/doc/S6bjhx2yyRV8/?page=3&arbitral-judge=&arbitralcourt=&arbitral-case_doc=&arbitral (date of access: 05.02.2022).
10. Resolution of the Thirteenth Arbitration Court of Appeal dated April 2, 2021 in case No. A56-130972/2019 // SudAkt. URL: https://sudact.ru/arbitral/doc/6nLk27UO9boa/?arbitral-txt (accessed on February 4, 2022).
11. Decision of the Arbitration Court of Samara Region dated May 26, 2015 in case No. A55-29200/2013 // SudAkt. URL: https://sudact.ru/arbitral/doc/1w1tX0BwJlQ3/?page=3&arbitral-judge=&arbitralcourt=&arbitral-case_doc=&arbitral (accessed on February 5, 2022).
