An Institution of Liability for Causing Harm: A Current State and Ways of Improvement

The concept of harm has been examined in the context of the current legislation, doctrine, judicial practice. The paper has determined characteristic cases of causing harm to the participants of relations regulated under civil law. It is concluded that the absence of a legal definition of the concept of harm has resulted in the confusion of the legal categories “causing harm” and “causing damages” as a condition for tort liability in public law and judicial practice. The author has given her own classification of types of harm and determined classification of property damage. The paper has clarified the content of the concept of non-property (reputational) harm caused to a legal entity. The paper has carried out a comparative study of the concepts harm, damages, and losses. It is causing harm rather than causing damages that gives rise to tort liability. The paper has examined the problems of application of rules on recovery of caused damages. The paper analyzes the subinstitution, namely, obligations arising as a result of harm caused by acts of public authority in the field of public administration and law enforcement. The author has determined the features of tort liability conditions for damage caused by state authorities, local selfgovernment bodies and their officials and peculiarities of their subject composition. Attention is drawn to the civil law nature of binding legal relations arising as a result of harm in the field of criminal proceedings. The author has determined the features of tort liability for damage caused by officials during criminal procedural activity, subject composition of a tort obligation. It is proposed to introduce a defining norm of the concept harm as a generic concept and norms on specific division of harm. It is proposed to make a number of changes and additions to the subinstitution of obligation due to damage by acts of public authority.