Dear Ilya! Hello! Turnover of weapons on the territory Russian Federation regulated by a number of regulatory legal acts, first of all, by the Federal Law of December 13, 1996 No. 150-FZ “On Weapons”. So, for example, according to Article 27 of Law No. 150-FZ

Seizure of weapons and cartridges for them is carried out: 1) by internal affairs bodies in cases of: gross violation by legal entities of licensing requirements and conditions for the production, sale, storage or accounting of weapons and cartridges for them, as well as illegal manufacture, acquisition, sale, transfer, storage or transportation firearms until a final decision is made in the manner prescribed by the legislation of the Russian Federation; violations by citizens of the rules for the storage, manufacture, sale, transfer or use of weapons and cartridges for them, as well as the transfer of weapons until a final decision is made in the manner established by the legislation of the Russian Federation; cancellation in accordance with the established procedure of the license and (or) permission specified in this Federal Law; the death of the owner of a civilian weapon or the death of a citizen who legally had a military or service weapon; liquidation of a legal entity that owns a weapon;

The procedure for issuing relevant licenses is regulated by Article 13 of the said law, and the procedure for using the weapons themselves - by Article 25.

The procedure for canceling a license is disclosed in Article 26 of the Law:

A license to acquire a weapon and a permit to store or store and carry a weapon shall be canceled by the authorities that issued this license and (or) permit, in the event of: 1) voluntary refusal from the specified license and (or) permission, or liquidation of a legal entity, or death of the owner of the weapon; 2) rendering judgment on the deprivation of a citizen of the relevant special right, on the annulment of a license and (or) permit; 3) the occurrence of circumstances provided for by this Federal Law, excluding the possibility of obtaining a license and (or) permission; 4) cancellation hunting license in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation in the field of hunting and conservation of hunting resources (in relation to hunting weapon). In cases where a citizen violates the rules established by this Federal Law and the relevant regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation for storing, carrying, destroying, manufacturing, selling, transferring, transporting, transporting or using weapons and cartridges for it, as well as sending weapons by a citizen, a license issued to him to acquire weapons and (or) permission to store or store and carry weapons are temporarily withdrawn by the internal affairs body until a final decision is made in the manner prescribed by the legislation of the Russian Federation. In the event of a court imposing entity an administrative penalty in the form of an administrative suspension of activity for violating the rules in the field of circulation of weapons and cartridges for them, the license for the acquisition of weapons and (or) permission for the storage of weapons issued to this legal entity is withdrawn by the authority that issued such a license and (or) permission, for a period established by the court imposition of punishment. A license to acquire weapons and (or) permission to store weapons issued to a legal entity shall be annulled by a court decision on the basis of an application from the authority that issued the said license and (or) permission, if the violations committed by it have not been eliminated within the period of administrative suspension of the activities of the legal entity established by the court rules in the field of circulation of weapons and cartridges for it, which resulted in the imposition of a penalty in the form of an administrative suspension of the activities of this legal entity. In case of cancellation of a license to purchase weapons and (or) permission to store weapons, a legal entity has the right to re-apply for them after three years from the date of cancellation of the license and (or) permission, a citizen - after one year from the date of expiration of the term for imposing an administrative penalty in the form of deprivation of the right to acquire weapons or the right to keep or keep and carry weapons, or from the date of elimination of circumstances that preclude, in accordance with this Federal Law, the possibility of obtaining such a license and (or) permit. In the event of a voluntary refusal of a license and (or) permit There are no deadlines for re-applying for them.

Thus, Article 26 of the Law establishes an exhaustive list of cases in the presence of which the relevant license is cancelled.

Given that you have violated the rules for the production, sale, storage or accounting of weapons and ammunition for them, the procedure for issuing a certificate of training and testing knowledge of the rules for the safe handling of weapons and the presence of skills in the safe handling of weapons or medical reports on the absence of contraindications to possession weapons (Article 20.0 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, the license was canceled lawfully and legally.

However, in any case, taking into account your specific circumstances of violation of these rules, I advise you to apply to the court with an appropriate application to recognize the decision to annul the license as illegal and cancel it. The application is submitted to the court at your place of residence, the state fee is 200.00 rubles.

Permits, which include permission to purchase civilian weapons, as well as a license to store and carry them, must be obtained from the licensing department, after collecting a package of documents, passing a medical examination and completing special courses.

Cancellation of a weapons permit is a procedure that almost always occurs not at the initiative of the owner. The Internet is full of forums where citizens are trying to find justice, because, in their opinion, they were deprived without reason.

Reason for revoking a license

Cancellation of a license for a weapon is within the competence of the executive authority that issued this license. Issues of licensing work are assigned to the regional Department of the Russian Guard, under whose department the departments of licensing and permitting work were formed.

The regulation of Article 26 of the Federal Law "On Weapons" establishes the procedure for cancellation and indicates all possible reasons and foundations. In parallel with this document, it is necessary to consider the Code of Administrative Offenses of December 30, 2001, the Government Decree of July 21, 1998, as well as the order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs No. 646, which is also a regulation.

• A license can be canceled upon the expression of a voluntary desire of the owner of the weapon. An example is the situation when a citizen decided to stop hunting activities for a certain period of time. In order not to pay dues, he submits an application for cancellation.
• The license is automatically canceled after the death of the owner of the weapon.
• Permits can be issued to a legal entity. When a legal entity is liquidated, the permit is also cancelled.
• Employees of the LRRR can revoke a license for a weapon by a court decision.
• Also, the cancellation procedure is facilitated by other circumstances that were the objective reason for the refusal to issue this permit.
• The last reason is the cancellation of a hunting ticket.

Now consider the possible nuances that arise for each reason. It is these nuances that cause endless disputes, because the deprivation of a license is fraught with the fact that a citizen is forbidden not only to store, but also to buy weapons.

Voluntary cancellation

At first glance, this situation seems unrealistic. Indeed, who wants to voluntarily part with a license when incredible efforts, time and money have been spent to obtain it. We have already cited one of the situations, but there are a number of other cases of such a procedure for the liquidation of a permit document.

• Breakage and damage to the weapon, provided that it is beyond repair and restoration.
• The decision to completely stop the possession of weapons, that is, the citizen decided to surrender the weapon altogether.
• Alienation of weapons. Some penalties include the seizure of the weapon, but not the revocation of the license.

It often happens that people apply to the department to cancel the license for the reason that the hunting rifle is outdated or broken, and it is not planned to purchase a new one. The weapon itself must be handed over for recycling. The situation with weapons happens a lot, including non-standard ones.

If a citizen does not want to dispose of the gun and for some reason he could not sell it, then the license is canceled, and the weapon is transferred to the department. The transfer of weapons to the HRRR is documented, and this document is handed over to the former owner.

It should be noted that the real owner has the right to sell or transfer weapons to another person only with the permission of the HRRR. Alienated weapons can be sold, but for this, the seller and the buyer must visit the department. The weapon is submitted for examination, where its compliance with the main technical characteristics is established.

The gift or sale will be carried out by the owner, the employees of the department are not worried about this. Their task is to document the transaction. After a certain time, the new owner will pick up the weapon along with the relevant permits.

At the time of the transaction, the seller must still have a valid license, and the buyer must have permission to purchase. Otherwise, their actions will be regarded as a crime, for which violators may be deprived of their documents and their weapons confiscated.

Due to death

Weapons, including ammunition for weapons, are inherited along with other valuables and real estate on a common basis. Immediately after the death of a citizen, the cartridges and weapons belonging to him are subject to seizure by the staff of the LRRR. Seized weapons are stored in the department until the heirs document the rights of inheritance.

The shelf life is one year. To return the weapon, the new owner must present a document confirming the right to inherit, as well as a license to purchase. He has the right to sell weapons.

Due to liquidation of a legal entity

In practice, the owners of weapons are not only individuals, but also entire companies. In the event of liquidation of the company as a legal entity, the license is canceled, and all weapons are transferred to the LRO department for temporary storage.

The transfer of weapons takes place strictly according to the protocol, which indicates the date. The procedure for transferring weapons to a department is exactly the same as the procedure for transferring weapons to an individual.

In connection with the decision

The offenses committed by citizens in relation to the circulation of weapons is a good reason for the liquidation of a license. It should be emphasized that, according to statistics, this ground is most often found in judicial practice. Chapter 20 of the Code of Administrative Offenses is devoted to the questions of when exactly a permit can be withdrawn with or without confiscation of the weapon itself.

• For clearance permits fixed deadlines. If a citizen does not meet these deadlines, then the court, motivating his activities with Article 20.8. This article, in addition to a fine, provides for the deprivation of a weapon license for an administrative offense related to non-compliance with registration deadlines.
• Article 20.9 of the code provides for a similar punishment if the owner of a civilian or even service weapon installs an additional silencer or night vision device.
• Homemade Airguns and its sale is also considered a violation of the law with the ensuing consequences. This is stated in article 20.10.
• After acquiring a weapon, the owner is obliged to appear at the department in a maximum of two weeks. Delay is fraught with cancellation of the permit. Punishment is determined by clause 20.11.
• Regulations apply to the transport of firearms. Failure to comply with these requirements is considered as an administrative violation under Article 20.12.
• For violation of the rules of hunting related to shooting in an unspecified place, the court can not only take away the ROHA, but also the license to store the weapon itself. Although in some cases the very withdrawal of a hunting ticket already automatically leads to the annulment of permits.

Despite the fact that the law defines the annulment by the executive authority that issued the document, in most cases it is the court decision that is considered the basis. But it is the LRRR that directly confiscates weapons and liquidates the license.

Other circumstances

To consider this issue, it is necessary to refer to the requirements that apply to a citizen when applying for a license. If a license has already been issued, then one of the reasons for the refusal to issue is a direct basis for the liquidation of the previously issued document.

Recall that this may be a discrepancy with medical indicators, the presence of a criminal record, the presence of administrative penalties for violating public order. But let's take a closer look at these reasons.

• Violation of public order entails the imposition of an administrative penalty. If this happens again within a year, then the citizen will be deprived of a license. It should be noted that not every offense fits this point. For example, violation of traffic rules also leads to administrative responsibility, but this violation cannot be qualified as an encroachment on the peace of citizens. If the owner of the weapon drunk starts demonstrating a gun, and even in a crowded place, and also shoots, then if such an act is repeated, the court, in addition to the main fine, will decide to annul the license.
• Offenses in the field of use or distribution of drugs even entail criminal liability. One such violation is enough to deprive documents for weapons.
• Mental problems that have arisen will not allow a citizen to receive an appropriate certificate during a medical examination. Unfortunately, this is revealed only when applying for the extension of the permit.
• Continuing the topic of health, it is necessary to note some more diseases that contribute to the further withdrawal of a license, these are, first of all, diseases of the organs of vision, trauma to the limbs, damage to the hands.
• Imprisonment or conviction for murder automatically leads to the revocation of the weapons permit.
• The last point we will consider is the most controversial. By law, when applying for a license, a citizen is required to provide a passport and show registration. This means that the owner of the weapon must have the main document with him, as well as be registered for permanent residence. Not only deregistration becomes a reason for license cancellation, but also damage to a personal document.

The decision of the court is not the annulment itself. This decision must go to the LRR department and be legally executed. On official letterhead, the citizen is sent a written notice indicating the reasons for the cancellation.

The citizen has a chance to overturn such a decision in a higher court. To do this, he must submit the appropriate petition. Moreover, 10 days are counted not from the moment the notification is received from the LRRR, but from the moment the court makes a decision.

Federal Law "On Weapons", N 150-FZ | Art. 26

Article 26

A license to acquire weapons and a permit to store or store and carry weapons are canceled by the authorities that issued these licenses and (or) permits in the event of:

1) voluntary renunciation of the said license and (or) permission, or termination (absence) of the legal entity specified in paragraphs 2 - 7 of Article 10 of this Federal Law, the right to acquire (storage, use) weapons, or liquidate the legal entity, or death of the owner of the weapon;

2) issuance of a court decision on the deprivation of a citizen of the relevant special right, on the annulment of a license and (or) permit;

3) the occurrence of circumstances stipulated by paragraph two of part four of Article 9 and paragraphs 2-10 of part twenty of Article 13 of this Federal Law, excluding the possibility of obtaining a license and (or) permission;

4) cancellation of a hunting license in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation in the field of hunting and conservation of hunting resources (in relation to hunting weapons).

In cases where a citizen violates the rules established by this Federal Law and the relevant regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation for storing, carrying, destroying, manufacturing, selling, transferring, transporting, transporting or using weapons and cartridges for it, as well as sending weapons by a citizen, a license issued to him to acquire weapons and (or) permission to store or store and carry weapons are temporarily withdrawn by the federal executive body authorized in the field of arms circulation, or by its territorial body until a final decision is made in the manner established by the legislation of the Russian Federation, or by internal affairs bodies with subsequent transfer to territorial body of the federal executive body authorized in the field of arms trafficking.

In the event that a court imposes an administrative penalty on a legal entity in the form of an administrative suspension of activities for violating the rules in the field of circulation of weapons and cartridges for them, the license to acquire weapons and (or) permission to store weapons issued to this legal entity shall be withdrawn by the authority that issued such licenses and (or ) permission, for the period of imposition of punishment established by the court.

A license to acquire weapons and (or) permission to store weapons issued to a legal entity shall be annulled by a court decision on the basis of an application from the authority that issued the said license and (or) permission, if the violations committed by it have not been eliminated within the period of administrative suspension of the activities of the legal entity established by the court rules in the field of circulation of weapons and cartridges for it, which resulted in the imposition of a penalty in the form of an administrative suspension of the activities of this legal entity.

In case of cancellation of a license to purchase weapons and (or) permission to store weapons, a legal entity has the right to re-apply for them after three years from the date of cancellation of the license and (or) permission, a citizen - after one year from the date of expiration of the term for imposing an administrative penalty in the form of deprivation of the right to acquire weapons or the right to keep or keep and carry weapons, or from the date of elimination of circumstances that preclude, in accordance with this Federal Law, the possibility of obtaining such a license and (or) permit.

In the event of a voluntary refusal of a license and (or) permission, the terms for re-applying for their receipt are not established.

• BB code
• Text

Document URL [copy ]

Commentary on Art. 26 of the Weapons Act

1. The commented article provides grounds for the voluntary and compulsory annulment and withdrawal of a license to acquire weapons and (or) permission to keep or keep and carry them.

The first ground, established in paragraph 1 of part 1, is not compulsory and is associated with three circumstances: the actual voluntary refusal of a license and (or) permit; liquidation of a legal entity; death of the owner of the weapon.

In case of voluntary refusal by the owner of the license, an application is written to the internal affairs body. Weapons are also confiscated and, as a rule, subject to destruction. The grounds and procedure for the liquidation of a legal entity are regulated in detail in Art. 61 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (part 1). In accordance with Art. 3 of the Federal Law of November 15, 1997 N 143-FZ "On acts of civil status" the death of an individual is subject to registration in the registry office. State registration is carried out by the registry office by compiling an appropriate civil status record, on the basis of which a death certificate is issued. The grounds and procedure for state registration of death are described in detail in Chapter VIII of this Law. On the inheritance of weapons, see the commentary to Art. twenty.

In accordance with Art. 3.8 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses, the deprivation of an individual who has committed an administrative offense of a special right previously granted to him is established for gross or systematic violation of the procedure for using this right in cases provided for by the articles of the Special Part of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses. Deprivation of a special right is appointed by a judge. The period of deprivation of a special right may not be less than one month and more than three years. In Chapter 20 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses, the specified type of administrative punishment is provided for in Part 4 of Art. 20.8 - for a period of six months to one year; Part 3 Art. December 20 - for a period of one to two years; Art. 20.13 - from one to three years with confiscation of weapons and cartridges for them. The decision of the judge on the deprivation of the right to acquire and store or store and carry weapons and cartridges for them is executed officials internal affairs bodies (part 6 of article 32.5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation). The decision of the judge is executed by canceling the license and (or) permit for weapons with the withdrawal of it. After the expiration of the period of deprivation of a special right, these documents are returned to their owner at his request within one working day (parts 3.1, 4, article 32.6 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation).

Paragraph 3 of part 1 of the commented article establishes that licenses for the acquisition, as well as permits for the storage or storage and carrying of weapons, are canceled by the authorities that issued these licenses or permits, in the event of the occurrence of circumstances provided for by the commented Law, excluding the possibility of obtaining licenses or permits. In accordance with Part 7 of Art. 13 of the commented Law, citizens of the Russian Federation have the right to acquire hunting firearms with rifled barrel provided that they have not committed offenses related to violation of the rules of hunting, production of weapons, arms trade, sale, transfer, acquisition, collection or display, accounting, storage, carrying, transportation, transportation and use of weapons. Thus, bringing a citizen to administrative responsibility for violating the rules of hunting (part 1 of article 8.37 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation) is the basis for the annulment of a permit to store and carry hunting firearms with a rifled barrel.

Cancellation of a hunting license is also grounds for the annulment and withdrawal of a license and (or) weapons permit, but only in relation to hunting weapons.

The grounds for canceling a hunting ticket are listed in accordance with Art. 21 of the Federal Law of July 24, 2009 N 209-FZ. These include:

1) non-compliance of an individual with one of the following requirements:

Possession of civil capacity in accordance with civil law, the absence of an outstanding or unexpunged conviction for an intentional crime;

Acquaintance with the requirements of the hunting minimum;

2) submission by the hunter of an application for the cancellation of his hunting ticket;

3) a court decision (for example, deprivation of a special right in the form of the right to hunt for an administrative offense - part 1 of article 8.37 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation).

The hunting license is canceled by the executive authority of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation.

2. In case of violation of the rules for the circulation of weapons, a license (permit) may be withdrawn in accordance with the rules provided for in Art. 27.10 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation. We are talking about the use by authorized officials of the internal affairs bodies of such a measure to ensure the proceedings in cases of administrative offenses, as the seizure of things and documents.

3. Administrative suspension of activities is appointed in accordance with Art. 3.12 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation and consists in the temporary termination of the activities of persons engaged in entrepreneurial activities without forming a legal entity, legal entities, their branches, representative offices, structural divisions, production sites, as well as the operation of units, facilities, buildings or structures, the implementation certain types activities (works), provision of services for up to ninety days. For example, an administrative suspension of activities is appointed by a judge for gross violations of the rules for the circulation of weapons under parts 2, 5, 6 of Art. 20.8, Art. 20.10 of the RF Code of Administrative Offenses.

Case law under section 26 of the Weapons Act:

• Decision of the Supreme Court: Ruling N 308-KG16-1326, Judicial Collegium for Economic Disputes, cassation

  Implementation of state control (supervision) and municipal control" in this case are not applicable, guided by clause 22 of part 1 of article 13 of Federal Law No. 3-FZ of February 7, 2011 "On the Police", the provisions of part 4 of Article 9, Article 22, clause 3 of part 1 of Article 26 of Federal Law No. 150-FZ of December 13, 1996 " On weapons", the provisions of clause 55 of the Rules for the circulation of civilian and service weapons and cartridges for them on the territory of the Russian Federation ...

• Decision of the Supreme Court: Ruling N 308-KG16-961, Judicial Collegium for Economic Disputes, cassation

  Paragraphs 24.2, 28 and 28.6 of the Administrative Regulations in the field of control of the circulation of weapons, and also took into account the decision of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of April 16, 2015 No. 8-P, which assessed the constitutionality of paragraph 3 of part 1 of article 26 of the Law on weapons. The court, after analyzing the violations imputed to the fault of the security company, taking into account the systematic interpretation of the said norms of law and the actual circumstances of a particular case, came to the conclusion ...

• Decision of the Supreme Court: Determination N VAC-426/09, Collegium for Administrative Legal Relations, Supervision

+More...

Hello Roman.

They can cancel a weapon permit for repeated violations, including hunting rules during the year.

If the protocol was drawn up in March 2016 and you were held liable according to it, you did not challenge the decision, then you may have your permission to store and carry weapons canceled after being brought to administrative responsibility again.

Did you get punished under the first protocol?

Federal Law No. 150-FZ of December 13, 1996
(as amended on 07/06/2016)
"About weapons"
Article 26
A license to acquire weapons and a permit to store or store and carry weapons are canceled by the authorities that issued these licenses and (or) permits in the event of:
1) voluntary refusal of the specified license and (or) permission, or liquidation of a legal entity, or death of the owner of the weapon;
2) issuance of a court decision on the deprivation of a citizen of the relevant special right, on the annulment of a license and (or) permit;
ConsultantPlus: note.
On the recognition of paragraph 3 of part one of Article 26 as inconsistent with the Constitution of the Russian Federation in the sense given by law enforcement practice, see Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of April 16, 2015 N 8-P.
3) the occurrence of circumstances provided for by this Federal Law, excluding the possibility of obtaining a license and (or) permission; 4) cancellation of a hunting license in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation in the field of hunting and conservation of hunting resources (in relation to hunting weapons).
In cases where a citizen violates the rules established by this Federal Law and the relevant regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation for storing, carrying, destroying, manufacturing, selling, transferring, transporting, transporting or using weapons and cartridges for it, as well as sending weapons by a citizen, a license issued to him to acquire weapons and (or) permission to store or store and carry weapons are temporarily withdrawn by the federal executive body authorized in the field of arms circulation, or by its territorial body until a final decision is made in the manner established by the legislation of the Russian Federation, or by internal affairs bodies with subsequent transfer to territorial body of the federal executive body authorized in the field of arms trafficking.

Article 13. The right to purchase weapons by citizens of the Russian Federation
A license to purchase weapons is not issued to citizens of the Russian Federation:
5) repeatedly brought to administrative responsibility within a year for committing an administrative offense encroaching on public order and public safety, or established order management, an administrative offense related to violation of the rules of hunting, or an administrative offense in the field of trafficking in narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, their analogues or precursors, plants containing narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances or their precursors, or their parts containing narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances or their precursors, with the exception of administrative offenses related to consumption of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances without a doctor's prescription or new potentially dangerous psychoactive substances - until the end of the period during which the person is considered to be subjected to administrative punishment;

Sincerely! G.A. Kuraev

NistelXl 19-03-2015 19:50

Good afternoon everyone. The situation is as follows: they canceled the licenses for weapons (2 smooth ones, one LLC) for repeated administration within a year. The first was in the summer of 2014, article 20.1 part 1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, the second in February 2015, article 20.11 part 1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses. There are two questions of interest:

1) After what period do I have the right to apply for new licenses in order to return the weapon (as I understand it, the old ROCs will not be returned to me and I will have to get everything all over again)?

2) Is it written anywhere in the law how long a weapon can be stored after being seized in the police department? In words, an employee of the LRO said that they keep no more than six months, and it is better to transfer it to a friend. When asked what would happen in six months, he did not answer clearly.

Thanks in advance for your replies.

sixforest 19-03-2015 20:17

quote: After what period do I have the right to apply for new licenses in order to return the weapon (as I understand it, the old ROCs will not be returned to me and I will have to get everything all over again)?

As soon as 1 year has passed since the adoption of the 1st admin.

In case of cancellation of a license for the acquisition of weapons and (or) permission to store weapons, a legal entity has the right to re-apply for their receipt after three years from the date of cancellation of the license and (or) permission, a citizen - after one year or from the date of elimination of circumstances excluding in accordance with this Federal Law, the possibility of obtaining such licenses and (or) permits.

slavunty 24-03-2015 12:35

two violations during the year from chapter 20 of the Code of Administrative Offenses and goodbye weapons

slavunty 24-03-2015 12:38

stupidly did not pay 2 times any fine within one year, even a traffic cop, and go ahead, go hand over the trunks

sixforest 24-03-2015 13:15

quote: Yes, but what about the weapons?

A year later, they will sell the money back to the owner.

Vovan84 24-03-2015 14:51

quote: two violations during the year from chapter 20 of the Code of Administrative Offenses and goodbye weapons

That's right. Only this will be the annulment of the permit in accordance with the law on weapons, and not an administrative penalty in the form of deprivation of the right.

Vovan84 24-03-2015 20:31

slavunty, this means that since there was no deprivation of the right, then there will not be two years

slavunty 25-03-2015 09:11

unfortunately comrade. vovan84 all these exercises in Russian are nothing more than our desire to think that it’s not all right, I went through it myself, there’s nothing to hope for, I can add on my own that the LRO of my region has never suffered from obscurantism and I’m a hundred pounds sure that they wouldn’t make a gag, well, not believing their words too much, I studied this issue myself, so I’m speaking as someone who saw the problem from the inside, I myself had two detentions while intoxicated, both times a hundred rubles a fine and released, for show, fucking. .

slavunty 02-04-2015 16:13

I was in the LRR department, again received assurances of the inviolability of my seized property, it is not necessary to submit the docks after the expiration of 2 years from the date of the decision, I learned that the issue of providing all canceled docks on training is being resolved.

slavunty 28-04-2015 08:10

they called from the gunsmith, they were interested in whether I would pick up the weapon, I confirmed my intention to pick it up, they said to call back as soon as I arrange the docks, the barrel began to be in place after two years ..

e$ya 28-04-2015 10:52

Judge: Deal? 33-3204/2014

APPEALS DETERMINATION

Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Regional Court composed of:

having considered in open court session on the report of the judge September 09, 2014 the case on the appeal of the representative of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia at “address” against the decision of the district court dated June 17, 2014 on the case on the application for challenging the actions,

ESTABLISHED a citizen applied to the court to challenge the actions of the Center for Licensing and Permitting Work of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, indicating that he is the owner of a hunting firearm with a rifled barrel of the "data seized" brand of caliber ?.

The applicant was issued a permit for the storage and carrying of said weapons on DD.MM.YYYY until DD.MM.YYYY.

DD.MM.YYYY was brought to administrative responsibility for committing an administrative offense under Part 4 of Art. 20.8 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, a fine in the amount of "data seized" rubles was imposed.

DD.MM.YYYY the applicant's permit to store and carry a hunting rifle was canceled by the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs at “address”.

DD.MM.YYYY applied to the CLRR of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia at the “address” with an application for the restoration of the said permit, which he was denied.

Considering the refusal of the Center for Licensing and Permitting of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia at “address” to be unlawful, the applicant, according to specified requirements, requested that the refusal of the Center for Licensing and Permitting Work of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia at “address” to issue him a license to purchase hunting firearms with a rifled barrel and cartridges for it, as well as to restore and issue a permit for the right to store and carry hunting weapons with a rifled barrel, to impose on the Center for Licensing and Permitting Work of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia at the “address” the obligation to consider issuing a license to acquire hunting firearms with a rifled barrel and cartridges for it, and also the issuance of a permit for the right to keep and carry hunting firearms with a rifled barrel of the series?, issued to him by DD.MM.YYYY for the storage and carrying of hunting firearms with a rifled barrel of the “data seized” brand, caliber 30? in the manner prescribed by law.

The court decided to invalidate the refusal of the Center for Licensing and Permitting of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia at the “address” to issue a license to purchase hunting firearms with a rifled barrel and cartridges for it.

To impose on the Center for Licensing and Permitting Work of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia at the “address” the obligation to consider the issue of issuing a license for the purchase of hunting firearms with a rifled barrel and cartridges for it, as well as the issue of issuing a permit for the storage and carrying of hunting weapons with a rifled barrel brand "" data seized"" caliber? ? ? in the manner prescribed by law.

The representative of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia at the “address” asks for the cancellation of the decision of the court of first instance, as taken in violation of the norms of procedural and substantive law. Counts that the court did not take into account the provisions of h. 5 Article. 26 of the Federal Law "On Weapons" and the fact that in the period from DD.MM.YYYY to DD.MM.YYYY, circumstances continued to operate that preclude the possibility of obtaining the required licenses and permits.

After hearing the report on the case of the judge of the regional court, after hearing the representatives of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia at the “address”, who supported the arguments of the appeal, objections and his representative, having checked the case materials, having discussed the arguments of the appeal and objections against it, the judicial collegium, guided by the rules of Art. 327.1 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, considers the case within the arguments of the appeal, and comes to the following.

Established that the decision? ? in the case of an administrative offense from DD.MM.YYYY found guilty of an administrative offense, under Part. 4 Article. 20.8 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, a fine in the amount of “data seized” rubles (l.d. ?) was imposed.

DD.MM.YYYY the fine was paid (ld ?).

DD.MM.YYYY in connection with the indicated circumstances, according to the conclusion of the inspector for the o / p CLRR of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia at the “address” of the permission of the ROHA series? for the storage and carrying of hunting firearms with a rifled barrel ""data seized"" caliber?

In 2014, he applied to the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia at the “address” for issuing a license to purchase hunting firearms, which was denied to him by a message from DD.MM.YYYY with reference to Art. 26 FZ "On weapons".

Satisfying the application, the court of first instance was guided by the provisions of the Federal Law of DD.MM.YYYY? 150-FZ "On weapons", the instructions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, set out in the Resolution of DD.MM.YYYY? 16-P., Art. 4.6. Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, art. 258 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation and came to the conclusion that the actions of the CLRR of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia at the “address” were unlawful, since the period during which the applicant should be considered subjected to administrative punishment expired on DD.MM.YYYY.

The Judicial Collegium agrees with this conclusion of the Court of First Instance for the following reasons.

By virtue of Art. 26 of the Federal Law of December 13, 1996 N 150-FZ "On Weapons", a license to purchase weapons and a permit to store or store and carry weapons are canceled by the authorities that issued this license and (or) permit, in the event of the occurrence of circumstances provided for by this Federal Law, excluding the possibility of obtaining a license and (or) permission. In the event of cancellation of a license to purchase weapons and (or) permission to store weapons, a legal entity has the right to re-apply for them after three years from the date of cancellation of the license and (or) permission, a citizen - after one year: from the date of elimination of circumstances excluding in accordance with this Federal Law, the possibility of obtaining such licenses and (or) permits.

In paragraph 10 of Art. 13 of the above law, as amended, in force at the time the applicant applied to the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia at the “address” for issuing a license to purchase hunting firearms and at the time of refusal to satisfy his application, it was said that: the right to purchase hunting firearms with a rifled barrel and sports firearms with a rifled barrel, these categories of citizens have, provided that they have not committed offenses related to violation of the rules of hunting, the rules for the production of weapons, the arms trade, sale, transfer, acquisition, collection or display, accounting, storage, carrying, transportation , transportation and use of weapons.

The provision of part ten of Article 13 of the Federal Law "On Weapons" was recognized by the Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated DD.MM.YYYY N 16-P as inconsistent with the Constitution of the Russian Federation to the extent that it, without specifying the period of the ban on the acquisition of hunting firearms with rifled trunk by citizens who have committed offenses related to the violation of the rules of hunting, the rules for the production of weapons, the arms trade, the sale, transfer, acquisition, collection or display, accounting, storage, carrying, transportation, transportation and use of weapons, as well as the type of legal liability, in connection with which this administrative preventive measure is assigned, due to its uncertainty, which gives rise to the possibility of ambiguous interpretation and arbitrary application, allows us to consider it as established in relation to such citizens indefinitely - regardless of the degree of public danger and the severity of the offense committed, as well as the period, during which the person is considered subjected to administrative or criminal punishment.

At the same time, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation pointed out that until the introduction of a new legal regulation, citizens who committed administrative offenses related to the violation of the rules of hunting, the rules for the production of weapons, the sale of weapons, the sale, transfer, acquisition, collection or display, accounting, storage, carrying, transportation, transportation and use of weapons, have the right to apply for a license to purchase hunting firearms with a rifled barrel after the expiration of the period during which the person is considered subjected to administrative punishment (Article 4.6 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation). (1 YEAR from the date of payment of the fine)

In accordance with the provisions of Art. 4.6. of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, a person who has been sentenced to an administrative penalty for committing an administrative offense is considered to have been subjected to this penalty from the date the decision on the imposition of an administrative penalty comes into force until the expiration of one year from the date of completion of the execution of this decision.

According to the above legal norms, in the period from DD.MM.YYYY to DD.MM.YYYY was considered a person subjected to administrative punishment, and after this period had the right to apply for a license to purchase hunting firearms.

Link of the appeal to the fact that in Art. 13 of the law "On weapons" we are talking on the initial application of a citizen on the issue of obtaining a license, while Art. 26 of this law regulates the repeated appeal of a citizen after the annulment of his permit to store and carry weapons, is based on an incorrect interpretation of the law, since in the above Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, when assessing the compliance of the Constitution with the provisions of paragraph 10 of Art. 13 of the Law "On Weapons" considered the issue of the period after which it is citizens who have committed administrative offenses related to the violation of the rules of hunting, the rules for the production of weapons, the sale of weapons, the sale, transfer, acquisition, collecting or exhibiting, recording, storing, carrying, transporting, transporting and using weapons.

In addition, the panel of judges takes into account that on April 13, 2014, a new version of Part 10 of Art. 13 of the Law "On Weapons", according to which provisions on the prohibition on the acquisition of hunting firearms with a rifled barrel and sports firearms with a rifled barrel by citizens who have committed offenses related to violation of the rules of hunting, rules for the production of weapons, arms trafficking, sale , transfer, acquisition, collection or display, accounting, storage, carrying, transportation, transportation and use of weapons.

The arguments of the appeal do not contain data that would not have been verified by the court of first instance when considering the case, but would be essential for its resolution, or information that refutes the conclusions of the court, and cannot be the basis for canceling the court decision.

In view of the foregoing, the panel of judges believes that the court examined all the circumstances of the case with sufficient completeness, gave a proper assessment of the evidence presented, the court’s conclusions do not contradict the case materials, the legally significant circumstances in the case were correctly established by the court, the substantive law was applied correctly by the court, procedural violations entailing for a cancellation of the decision, the court is not allowed. There are no grounds for annulment of the court's decision on the grounds set forth in the complaint.

Guided by Article.Article. 328-329 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, judicial board

DETERMINED:

The decision of the district court of June 17, 2014 is left unchanged, the appeal is not satisfied.

e$ya 28-04-2015 11:05

Apparently, you can get a new license only after 1 year after the last administration, and not the first. You can challenge the latter if you prove in court that you were on a business trip or have been sick for so long. It is necessary again with a lawyer, then there will be no cancellation. The shelf life of weapons in the police department is 1 year, after which I can sell it, again, as you bow. If possible, negotiate with the store and put it on sale, and after obtaining a license, you will issue it for yourself.

Ac1 12-07-2015 12:42

same problem!!!
so why did they come?
- two years after the first administration?
- second?
- one year after the annulment order7
- after 2 years?

Alien33 12-07-2015 13:57

Ay, Ratnikov, friend, will you be able to explain the solution to the TC and others?
... ps: well, they don’t read decisions ... For the life of me ...

Alien33 12-07-2015 14:06

Ac1 12-07-2015 14:14

TS, bring the docks this summer, and don't be a hooligan anymore. At the same time, you will find out how they know the law in your LRRR.

My fault is on the floor of the administration, but that's another story ...
I would have arguments, everything is written in two ways in the law! What to argue?
I will be grateful for your help...

Alien33 12-07-2015 14:34

What to argue?

Termination of circumstances preventing receipt/return. Art. 26, penultimate paragraph. Thank God, everything is clear and understandable.
... All the same, do not be a bully. Especially with weapons. Bullet-fool ... Takes off, it will be too late. I have never taken my Cordon anywhere since the day of purchase. For myself, a feather, for escort, a Boar ...

Ac1 12-07-2015 14:48

quote: Originally posted by Alien33:

Still not a bully. Especially with weapons. Bullet-fool ... Takes off, it will be too late. I have never taken my Cordon anywhere since the day of purchase. For myself, a feather, for escort, a Boar ...

I have a smooth hunting, I take only in the grounds

Ac1 12-07-2015 15:12

a citizen - upon the expiration of one year from the date of expiration of the term for imposing an administrative penalty in the form of deprivation of the right to acquire weapons or the right to keep or keep and carry weapons or from the date of elimination of circumstances precluding, in accordance with this Federal Law, the possibility of obtaining such licenses and (or) permissions.

Here's what I don't understand:
from the date of expiration of the term for imposing an administrative penalty in the form of deprivation of the right to acquire weapons or the right to keep or keep and carry weapons

I would like to hear from people who have experienced deprivation in practice ...

ps I really don’t want to miss the autumn hunt

dEretik 12-07-2015 16:21

quote: Here's what I don't understand:
from the date of expiration of the term for imposing an administrative penalty in the form of deprivation of the right to acquire weapons or the right to keep or keep and carry weapons

There were no deadlines, there was a decision by such and such a date for cancellation in connection with this and that.
I understand the year from the date of cancellation? And in LRO they give me two years from the moment of the first violation!

Cancel can be a couple of days before the expiration of the sentence. Will you also wait a year? Disputes over the wording of the law are regular here. The decision of the Constitutional Court strengthens the arguments of supporters that it is possible to apply from the moment the circumstances preventing obtaining licenses are eliminated. Those. one year from the date of completion of the decision.

Ac1 12-07-2015 16:42

before the expiration of the term of punishment - the term of punishment is a year after the first administrative violation?
one year from the date of completion of the execution of the decision - one year from the date of the annulment decision?

first admin 2.01.14
second admin 8.04.14
annulment order 10.07.14

Alien33 12-07-2015 16:46

quote: Originally posted by Ac1:

Here's what I don't understand:
from the date of expiration of the term for imposing an administrative penalty in the form of deprivation of the right to acquire weapons or the right to keep or keep and carry weapons

This is for administrative PUNISHMENTS in the form of deprivation of rights. There is no deprivation of rights, as a punishment, in a year.

Disputes over the wording of the law are regular here.

Yes, in this part, on the contrary, everything is clear. And after that decision of the Constitutional Court, it became even clearer, because Art. 13 shaken up.

Alien33 12-07-2015 16:58

quote: Originally posted by Ac1:

first admin 2.01.14
second admin 8.04.14
annulment order 10.07.14

I understand that I can already apply?

You've been mocking yourself for six months. You already have both...

dEretik 12-07-2015 17:29

quote: Yes, in this part, on the contrary, everything is clear. And after that decision of the Constitutional Court, it became even clearer, because Art. 13 shaken up.

They shook it up and it became clear, and even before the shake-up, that it was wrong to deprive for life. Before the shake-up, the decision of the Constitutional Court was in force, apply in a year ... As soon as the law was changed, in pursuance of the decision of the Constitutional Court, so again you need to look at what is written in the law. If not approached systematically, then the wording of Article 26 itself does not allow us to conclude that there is no need to wait a year after the expiration of the sentence. It is difficult to apply the rules of the Russian language there, the presentation is not literary. The literal interpretation is debatable. But taking into account other norms of the law, and taking into account the term of administrative punishment, as well as the wording of the Constitutional Court, which was derived under the current wording of Article 26 and the term for appeal was determined a year from the date of punishment, then everything should remain the same: from the moment the circumstances are eliminated.

GorTop 14-07-2015 19:17

quote: Originally posted by dEretik:

They shook it up and it became clear, and even before the shake-up, that it was wrong to deprive for life. Before the shake-up, the decision of the Constitutional Court was in force, apply in a year ... As soon as the law was changed, in pursuance of the decision of the Constitutional Court, so again you need to look at what is written in the law. If not approached systematically, then the wording of Article 26 itself does not allow us to conclude that there is no need to wait a year after the expiration of the sentence. It is difficult to apply the rules of the Russian language there, the presentation is not literary. The literal interpretation is debatable. But taking into account other norms of the law, and taking into account the term of administrative punishment, as well as the wording of the Constitutional Court, which was derived under the current wording of Article 26 and the term for appeal was determined a year from the date of punishment, then everything should remain the same: from the moment the circumstances are eliminated.

Please refute:

"after one year from the date of expiration of the term for imposing an administrative penalty in the form of deprivation of the right to acquire weapons or the right to keep or keep and carry weapons, or from the date of elimination of circumstances precluding, in accordance with this Federal Law, the possibility of obtaining such a license and (or) permit. "

Circumstances were eliminated on 01/03/15. Plus a year. Where is the mystery?

Alien33 14-07-2015 20:07

All this time I have been merging the Code of Administrative Offenses and the ZoO.
So: Code of Administrative Offenses, art. 4.6 - adyn year. The circumstances have disappeared (we do not take into account the execution time) - one more year from now, but already under Art. 13 Zoo. In other words: I'm wrong, the Code of Administrative Offenses and the Zoo are pressing us for 2 (!!!) years of total "deprivation".

dEretik 14-07-2015 23:10

quote: mystery

Theme already was, separate. Repeat to no purpose. A literal interpretation will not suffice. Why is the text of the decision of the Constitutional Court not taken into account? The court, in its argument, substantiated that the legislator has the right to establish restrictions. But the norm on rifled weapons does not have a certainty criterion. The CC does not write the law. He interprets it. There are already restrictions in the law. Legislator. They already are. But with regard to rifled - allow for uncertainties that violate the law. This is about Article 13. It is not said so about Article 26. And it is said that there is no unambiguity in the extension of the action of Article 13 to Article 26. After all, these are also limitations. They are already installed. And as the COP said - by right. These restrictions are set, but the Constitutional Court does not write the law. He did not add on his own behalf that the right to appeal arises in six months. Or in five years. Or three years later, like the yurikov. The Constitutional Court simply chose the term set by the legislator for any weapon, arising from the condition for obtaining a license. The law has been rewritten. Pursuant to the decision of the COP. This means that article 13 of the conditions for obtaining licenses extends to article 26, in terms of the right to apply. And another moment. The Constitutional Court, before the law is rewritten, allowed citizens who committed offenses to apply for a license after the expiration of the administrative penalty. Someone suggests that after the cancellation of the smooth-bore permit (due to circumstances) it was necessary to wait two years, and for a rifled one - in a year? Weapons, which according to the text of the COP are more dangerous than a smoothbore, get faster? The difference in the right of initial appeal, and re-application, was not emphasized by the court. The order applied to all offenders. Excluding those deprived of a special right by the court. In my opinion, the court simply took an already existing term from the text. It is also a condition for re-applying. From the moment the obstacles were eliminated ... Circumstances, at that time, either repetition from chapters 20 and 19, or a single violation of the hunting rules, etc ...

AU Ratnikov 14-07-2015 23:34

quote: Originally posted by dEretik:
Why is the text of the decision of the Constitutional Court not taken into account? ...

It is very likely that you are interpreting correctly here, but ... the elimination of uncertainty in such cases is possible only by an act of the Constitutional Court itself ... the courts develop their own practice in each region - from the bottom up there is a generalization and so on up to the Supreme Court, whose opinion, however, may not coincide with the opinion of the CC.
In this case, it seems that without the COP it is correct and unambiguous - it will not work.

In this connection, I think it’s inappropriate to formulate how it is here (in accordance with the opinion of the Constitutional Court and the Constitution) - in practice, such a position does not work in ordinary courts, and it is not required to apply to the Constitutional Court, the Constitutional Court formulates itself and only itself, regardless of the applicant's opinion.

dEretik 15-07-2015 12:16

quote: In this connection, I think it’s inappropriate to break my head formulating how it is here (in accordance with the opinion of the Constitutional Court and the Constitution) - in practice, such a position does not work in ordinary courts

But the topic was where the local court, in response to the police argument about the initial application (its difference from the second one) for a license, referred to the decision of the Constitutional Court, like there is no difference. Why didn't I mention that topic? There, the decision is not about what we are discussing, but the very fact that the court used the decision of the Constitutional Court is remarkable.

AU Ratnikov 15-07-2015 12:26

quote: Originally posted by dEretik:

but the very fact that the court used the decision of the Constitutional Court is remarkable

To a certain extent, yes.
Not uncommon in my practice.
A rarity for me is the direct application of international norms, there were only two times.

Let me remind you that usually at the very beginning of the process, the judge internally decides for himself which general view a decision is expected and further leads the process in the intended direction, to reinforce its position, which looks rather weak only when deriving customary norms, the opinion of the Constitutional Court fits very well.

dEretik 15-07-2015 12:47

The norm is slippery, and it can be strengthened by the decision of the Constitutional Court.
Another argument is that the same offenses should carry the same consequences in the form of restrictions. Not a punishment that depends on the circumstances. A limitation that does not depend on anything other than the condition of the law. If a citizen does not own a weapon and commits the same offenses (jointly) with a comrade who owns a weapon, then they should have the same right to apply for a license (permit) if we are talking about a restriction arising from the existence of offenses. Otherwise, inequality turns out, they crap together, and the right for one arises after the elimination of circumstances, and for the other, after a year has passed, from the moment the circumstances are eliminated. This results in a constraint that is exacerbated, i.e. increases in time, by annulment, which in turn is not a punishment, but a preventive measure. The procedure is administrative. Can the procedure bear consequences for determining the degree of restriction, given equal initial ones? Here, after the court decision on the deprivation of the right, the initial data are the same: the deprivation of the right by the court. The terms of deprivation are different, but this is a punishment. And there is only one restriction, equal for all disenfranchised: a year from the date of expiration of the term of punishment.

AU Ratnikov 15-07-2015 12:51

quote: Originally posted by dEretik:
If a citizen does not own a weapon and commits the same offenses (jointly) with a comrade who owns a weapon, then they should have the same right to apply for a license (permit) if we are talking about a restriction arising from the existence of offenses. Otherwise, inequality turns out, they crap together, and the right for one arises after the elimination of circumstances, and for the other, after a year has passed, from the moment the circumstances are eliminated.

Argument for CS.
Apparently true.