What liability is provided for under Art. 109 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for causing harm to health resulting in death? What if this happened due to negligence?

Causing death by negligence is a separate category of crimes . In this case, the guilty person acted not out of malice, but by accident. This unlawful act excludes the intentional deprivation of a person’s life, and is most often committed due to frivolity, oversight or negligence. Article 109 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation provides for death by negligence in the form of correctional labor (up to two years), restrictions on freedom, forced labor, imprisonment (all for up to two years).

Laws governing the situation

“Harm resulting in death” is a wording for which there is no specific article in the Criminal Code. There is Art. 118, dedicated to cases of grievous bodily harm caused by negligence .

There is also Art. 109 of the Criminal Code, which is referred to in the comments to Art. 118. It deals with manslaughter, but does not say anything about “grievous bodily harm”.

Art. 109 is the most suitable for considering such cases . If we take into account the terminology of pathologists, violent death occurs due to injuries incompatible with life, which can be considered as serious harm to health.

NOTE. Cases where initially unintentionally caused serious harm to health led to subsequent deterioration (illness, disability), which, in turn, led to death, remain questionable.

Also questionable is a situation where the accused did not cause severe harm, but death occurred. For example, he simply pushed, and because of this the person fell under a passing car. These cases are considered in a special order; their outcome is very individual and depends on every nuance of the situation.

More information about the issue of causing grievous bodily harm resulting in the death of the victim is here.

Concept

In accordance with the legislation currently in force in the territory of the Russian Federation, such a concept as “causing death by negligence” implies some specific action (or, conversely, the absence of a necessary action) that objectively caused the death or death of another person .

Thus,
the main difference between unintentional causing of death and premeditated murder is the lack of motive and intent.
However, one should not confuse concepts such as “causing death by negligence” and “accidentally causing death.”

The latter does not provide for criminal liability at all and is applicable exclusively in the following situations:

• when a person, although he foresaw the likelihood of causing death, took a number of measures to prevent this, but due to reasons or circumstances beyond his control, death still occurred;
• when a person did not expect and, in principle, could not in any way foresee the occurrence of death.

Statistics

There are no exact statistics on such cases, although official websites have figures for individual years. Moreover, they do not even appear in a separate column - they are simply mentioned under the table. If we take general indicators, then for every 1 million crimes of various nature there are 2-3.5 thousand cases where death was caused by negligence .

Fatal accidents , where responsibility for what happened lies with the driver, deserve special consideration. These offenses may also fall under the law on causing death by negligence, that is, under Article 109 of the Criminal Code.

In some years, the number of deaths reaches 70%, if calculated as a percentage. In general, their indicator “stays” at a high level.

Examples from judicial practice

Crimes classified under Article 109 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation occur quite often. They happen both at home and at work. Often their culprits are antisocial individuals who are not aware of the consequences of their actions, or workers who are negligent in their duties. Let us give several examples from judicial practice.

Example one

Gr. A. and gr. I. in the apartment of gr. A. drank alcoholic beverages. Having quarreled, gr. A. threw it into the gr. I. with a plate. Trying to evade, gr. I. sharply bent down and hit the temporal part of his head on the corner of the table, as a result of which he died. Gr. A. was convicted under Art. 109, part 1 and sentenced to 2 years of correctional labor.

Example two

Captain of the pleasure yacht gr. S., while on duty, i.e., traveling on a ship with 3 passengers, left his workplace. At the invitation of his passengers, he went down to the cabin where the guests were celebrating the holiday. At this time a squally wind blew up. The ship, being out of control, turned sideways to the rising wave and capsized.

As a result of the incident, 2 passengers died. Captain S. was prosecuted under Art. 109, part 3. Gr. S. was convicted and sentenced to 3 years' imprisonment.

If you still have questions about liability for causing death by negligence, write in the comments

Composition of the crime and its characteristics

According to Art. 109, the main features of this crime are as follows: :

• As a result of certain actions (possibly inaction) of one person, the death of another occurred.
• The causing of death was not intentional, i.e. happened by accident.
• The actions themselves that caused death were also not intentional. That is, the accused did not pursue the goal of inflicting grievous bodily harm.
• The actions or inactions of the accused that led to the situation were fully realized by him. The act implies negligence or frivolity, the consequence of which was the harm caused.

The last point is very important . If a person, suppose, intentionally caused serious harm to the health of his victim, but clearly did not count on a fatal outcome, then this case will be considered by the court under Art. 111, part 4. This carries a prison term of up to 15 years , which radically changes the situation.

REFERENCE. Lawyers point to a frequent situation when it is not clearly established in a case whether harm to health was intentionally caused, although the death of the victim was not part of the plans of the accused, and this has been proven.

Confusion between Art. 111 (clause 4) and art. 109 may result in too little punishment for a truly guilty person or too high a penalty for a person who committed a crime through negligence. Much depends on a good evidence base and the professionalism of the lawyer.

Art . 109 .

1. The concept of "criminal negligence" . A situation where the defendant failed to foresee that his actions or inactions could lead to death for another person. It is worth noting that this implies that it was possible to foresee such events.
2. The concept of "criminal frivolity" . A situation where the accused realized that the death of another person as a result of his inaction or action was possible, but assumed a different outcome of events, and without any particular reason. For example, a person hoped that this would not happen.

According to numerous publications by lawyers and advocates, Art. 109 is one of the most difficult to interpret events and separate them. Many cases turn out to be controversial for a number of reasons :

• the impossibility of accurately determining whether the accused was aware of the consequences;
• whether the actions were intentional;
• as well as the degree of his guilt.

Much depends on the circumstances of the case and witness testimony.

Crime classification

Let us analyze the characteristic aspects of the crime under Art. 109 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in the summary table:

To impute guilt to the suspect under Art. 109 of the Criminal Code requires proof of a cause-and-effect relationship between the actions or inaction of the suspect and the death of the victim.

Responsibility under Art. 109 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for unintentional injury to health resulting in death

If the case on this charge is carried out under Art. 109 of the Criminal Code, then the accused will be sentenced under one of the following possible options :

1. Correctional labor – up to 2 years.
2. Forced labor for the same period.
3. Restriction of freedom up to 2 years.
4. Imprisonment for a similar period.

Paragraph 2 of this article considers situations where death was caused by negligence due to improper performance of professional duties . In this case, the punishment may be one of the following :

• Restriction of freedom up to 3 years.
• Forced labor for the same period.
• Imprisonment for the same period.

Forced labor and imprisonment additionally include a ban on the ability to occupy certain positions or conduct certain activities. This rule can be imposed either for a certain period of up to 3 years or indefinitely, depending on the specific situation.

A separate point in the article is causing death by negligence to two or more persons. In this case, the punishment may be one of the following :

1. Restriction of freedom – up to 4 years.
2. Forced labor – a similar period.
3. Imprisonment for the same period. In this case, a ban may also be imposed on engaging in a certain type of activity or on the ability to hold a certain position. This is due to the fact that death by negligence of two or more persons is most often committed by a person at work or while driving.

Death by negligence as a criminal offense

The Criminal Code does not classify death by negligence as murder; this crime defines another form of guilt - unintentional actions or inaction. Read more about the inaction of an official under the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation https://lexconsult.online/7832-kogda-nastupaet-ugolovnaya-otvetstvennost-za-prestupnoe-bezdeistvie

The death of a person caused by negligence is considered in Article 109 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. This legislative act divides criminal acts that resulted in unintentional death into 3 parts. Two of them are classified depending on the subject of the crime.

The subject of this criminal act may be:

• private person;
• a person who has certain responsibilities due to professional duty or official position.

A perpetrator, vested with any official powers, bears a greater measure of responsibility for the crime committed than a private person.

Controversial situations in the investigation of such cases

The investigation of such cases carries many pitfalls. This happens because there are still many options for interpreting the behavior of the accused . There are cases when its intentionality or unintentionality is obvious, but this is not always the case.

An example of a controversial situation: one person pushed another. He fell and hit his head on a concrete slab, which is why he died. The actions of the defendant led to the death of the victim, but if not for an unfortunate set of circumstances, the deceased would have escaped with bruises and abrasions.

Perhaps this would not even fit under the article about minor harm to health. Could the accused even imagine such an outcome? The decision is up to the court.

There are many such and similar situations.

IMPORTANT! Witness testimony, if any, plays a big role in the investigation.

The most common confusion occurs with the following articles :

• Art. 111, part 4 of the Criminal Code , when grievous harm was caused intentionally, and the accused was fully aware of this, but did not think that it would lead to death.
• Art. 105 of the Criminal Code , when a person intentionally caused damage that led to death.